Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemma 4 31B
64
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
86
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 31B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Coding
+15.6 difference
Knowledge
+13.3 difference
Gemma 4 31B
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
$0 / $0
$null / $null
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
256K
1M
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 31B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 86 to 64. 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 coding, where it averages 57.2 against 41.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 26.5% to 48%. Gemma 4 31B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 31B.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 86 to 64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 26.5% and 48%.
Gemma 4 31B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 61.3 versus 48. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 57.2 versus 41.6. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.