Model comparison
GPT-5.4 vs MiMo-V2-Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 #8 (Supported); MiMo-V2-Flash #91 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 and MiMo-V2-Flash share 16 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 36 results are unique to GPT-5.4; 3 to MiMo-V2-Flash.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- GPT-5.4 only
- 36
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.4 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 74.24 to 54.06. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for MiMo-V2-Flash. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
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 | GPT-5.4 | Δ | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | GPT-5.457.6 | Margin→ 27.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 |
| Coding | GPT-5.457.7 | Margin→ 15.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.477.2 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Math | GPT-5.442.5 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.473.2 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 92.8%B 83.7%Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 9.1GPQA: GPT-5.4 scored 92.8%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 83.7%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 output | MiMo-V2-Flash$0 input / $0 output | MiMo-V2-Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.474 tok/s | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | MiMo-V2-Flash has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.4151.79 s | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | MiMo-V2-Flash reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.41.05M | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | GPT-5.4 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 75.1% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 79.0% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 82.7% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 75% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 54.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 87.1% | 83.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | 60.3% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | 73.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 41.1% | 12.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 33.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 44.7% | 16.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1395 | 833 | GPT-5.4 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 64.89% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 38.9% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 6.0% | — | Not comparable |
CodingMiMo-V2-Flash wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.7% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 67.42% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.0% | 49.8% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.6% | 25.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 73.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2-Flash wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.8% | 83.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| HLESource | 52.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 39.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.8% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 40.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | 59.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 51.4% | 24.7% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.0% | 65.6% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 41.6% | 8.0% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 5.7% | -48.5% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 50.0% | 15.2% | GPT-5.4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.6% | 75.1% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 48.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 84.9% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 81.2% | — | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | 53.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | 82.1% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 82.8% | — | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | 65.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | 61.1% | — | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | 85.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | 41.0% | — | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | 77.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 78.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1252 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.9% | 39.9% | GPT-5.4 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, GPT-5.4 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 74.24 to 54.06. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 92.8% and 83.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.4 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 57.6. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 57.7. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.