Model comparison
GPT-5.5 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-5.5 #9 (Estimated); MiMo-V2-Flash #91 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.5 and MiMo-V2-Flash share 16 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 41 results are unique to GPT-5.5; 3 to MiMo-V2-Flash.
Updated July 22, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- GPT-5.5 only
- 41
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick GPT-5.5 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-5.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 73.51 to 54.06. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $30.00 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-5.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, 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-5.5 | Δ | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | GPT-5.557.8 | Margin→ 26.9 | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 |
| Coding | GPT-5.558.6 | Margin→ 14.8 | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.581.6 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Reasoning | GPT-5.585.0 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Math | GPT-5.547.6 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.570.4 | 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 93.6%B 83.7%Winner: GPT-5.5Δ 9.9GPQA: GPT-5.5 scored 93.6%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 83.7%. GPT-5.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.5 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.5$5 input / $30 output | MiMo-V2-Flash$0 input / $0 output | MiMo-V2-Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.5Not available | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.5Not available | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.51M | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | GPT-5.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 82% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 78.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 75.3% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 55.6% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 93.9% | 83.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 44.9% | 12.0% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 37.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 49.5% | 16.7% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1490 | 833 | GPT-5.5 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 72.93% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 17.0% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 13.0% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 42.7% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 13.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1154 | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 42.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 46.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 86.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 45.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 31.3% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 84.3% | — | Not comparable |
CodingMiMo-V2-Flash wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 58.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 82.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 69.85% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | 59.2% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 58.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 74.9% | 49.8% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.1% | 25.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 43.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 73.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2-Flash wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 93.6% | 83.7% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 93.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 52.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 41.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 54.8% | 24.7% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 93.5% | 65.6% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 44.3% | 8.0% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 20.1% | -48.5% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 56.9% | 15.2% | GPT-5.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 85.5% | 75.1% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 84.9% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 75.9% | 39.9% | GPT-5.5 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, GPT-5.5 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
GPT-5.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 73.51 to 54.06. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 93.6% and 83.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.5 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 57.8. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.5 or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 58.6. 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.