Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-4.1
60
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
82
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 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
+2.6 difference
Knowledge
+18.3 difference
GPT-4.1
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
$2 / $8
$1 / $3
108 t/s
N/A
1.02s
N/A
1M
1M
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 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, 82 to 60. 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 54.6. GPT-4.1 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-4.1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $8.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.00 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens for MiMo-V2.5-Pro. That is roughly 2.7x on output cost alone. MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 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, 82 to 60.
GPT-4.1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.3 versus 48. MiMo-V2.5-Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 57.2 versus 54.6. GPT-4.1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.