Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 mini vs MiMo-V2.5

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

44.19/100
Margin
14.4pts
winning →
Xiaomi
58.62/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 mini #152 (Estimated); MiMo-V2.5 #62 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 mini and MiMo-V2.5 share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 21 results are unique to GPT-4.1 mini; 10 to MiMo-V2.5.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
1
GPT-4.1 mini only
21
MiMo-V2.5 only
10
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick MiMo-V2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 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 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 58.62 to 44.19. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

MiMo-V2.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 56.1 against 23.6.

MiMo-V2.5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 mini is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.

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 GPT-4.1 mini and MiMo-V2.5
CategoryGPT-4.1 miniΔMiMo-V2.5
CodingGPT-4.1 mini23.6Margin 32.5MiMo-V2.556.1
AgenticGPT-4.1 miniNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.565.8
KnowledgeGPT-4.1 mini64.2MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5Not measured
MathGPT-4.1 mini4.5MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5Not measured
MultimodalGPT-4.1 miniNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.579.0
Inst. FollowingGPT-4.1 mini88.5MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5Not measured

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-4.1 mini$0.4 input / $1.6 outputMiMo-V2.5Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-4.1 mini80 tok/sMiMo-V2.5Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-4.1 mini0.76 sMiMo-V2.5Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-4.1 mini1MMiMo-V2.51MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Result
AA Agentic IndexSource 1.7%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 52.9%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 0.1%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 503Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 62.3%Not comparable
MM-ClawBenchSource 23.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 65.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 46.89%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 16.9%Not comparable
CodingMiMo-V2.5 wins
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 23.6%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 20.2%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 40.4%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 56.1%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 65.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Result
AA-LCRSource 42.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Result
MMLUSource 87.5%Not comparable
GPQASource 64.2%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 14.8%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 66.4%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 4.6%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -50.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 17.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 82.0%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 4.483%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 58.7%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 10271291MiMo-V2.5 leads
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source 87.7%Not comparable
CharXivSource 81%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 77.9%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 miniMiMo-V2.5Result
IFEvalSource 88.5%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 38.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GPT-4.1 mini or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.62 to 44.19.

Which is better for coding, GPT-4.1 mini or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 56.1 versus 23.6. GPT-4.1 mini stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

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.