Skip to main content

Model comparison

Gemma 4 26B A4B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

57.96/100
Margin
12.2pts
winning →
70.19/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 26B A4B #67 (Supported); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 17 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Gemma 4 26B A4B; 14 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
17
Gemma 4 26B A4B only
3
MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
14
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 26B A4B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 70.19 to 57.96. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 48 against 43.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 17.2% to 48%.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 26B A4B.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Gemma 4 26B A4B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
CategoryGemma 4 26B A4BΔMiMo-V2.5-Pro
KnowledgeGemma 4 26B A4B43.4Margin 4.6MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0
AgenticGemma 4 26B A4BNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4
CodingGemma 4 26B A4BNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2
MultimodalGemma 4 26B A4B73.8MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemma 4 26B A4BB · MiMo-V2.5-Pro
  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 17.2%B 48%
    Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 30.8
    HLE: Gemma 4 26B A4B scored 17.2%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 48%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGemma 4 26B A4BMiMo-V2.5-ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemma 4 26B A4B$0 input / $0 outputMiMo-V2.5-ProNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableMiMo-V2.5-ProNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemma 4 26B A4BNot availableMiMo-V2.5-ProNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemma 4 26B A4B256KMiMo-V2.5-Pro1MMiMo-V2.5-Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiMo-V2.5-ProResult
AA Agentic IndexSource 11.0%29.1%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 43.6%94.2%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
GDPval-AASource 13.1%38.3%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
GDPval-AASource 7611265MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claw-EvalSource 63.8%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource 72.9%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 68.4%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 2.4%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 62.70%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 873Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 38.2%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 43.2%Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source 65.2%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 73.3%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiMo-V2.5-ProResult
AA Coding IndexSource 39.3%60.2%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
AA-SciCodeSource 40.0%50.2%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
SWE-bench ProSource 57.2%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 68.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiMo-V2.5-ProResult
AA-LCRSource 55.7%73.3%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
CritPtSource 0.0%4.0%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
KnowledgeMiMo-V2.5-Pro wins
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiMo-V2.5-ProResult
MMLU-ProSource 82.6%Not comparable
HLESource 17.2%48%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 8.7%34%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.7%42.2%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 79.2%86.6%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
AA-HLESource 18.3%33.8%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -48.1%3.6%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 18.2%22.6%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.9%24.5%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
AA Openness IndexSource 38.9%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiMo-V2.5-ProResult
MMMU-ProSource 73.8%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 69.2%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1298Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemma 4 26B A4BMiMo-V2.5-ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 72.4%79.9%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Gemma 4 26B A4B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 70.19 to 57.96. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 17.2% and 48%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 26B A4B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 48 versus 43.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 21, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.