Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-4.1 mini
45
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
86
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+33.6 difference
Knowledge
+16.2 difference
GPT-4.1 mini
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
$0.4 / $1.6
$null / $null
80 t/s
N/A
0.76s
N/A
1M
1M
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 86 to 45. 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 23.6. GPT-4.1 mini 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 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.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 86 to 45.
GPT-4.1 mini has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 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 23.6. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench Hard is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.