Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

See the free Radar Brief
OpenAI logo
Model A
GPT-5 mini

OpenAI

46.29/100

Supported · Public rank #163

90% interval 41.750.9

GPT-5 mini vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Xiaomi logo
Model B
MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Xiaomi

65.41/100

Supported · Public rank #41

90% interval 56.874.0

Decision reading

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.

0 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    MiMo-V2.5-Pro

    MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    GPT-5 mini and MiMo-V2.5-Pro are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    GPT-5 mini is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. GPT-5 mini does not fit this workload in one request. GPT-5 mini has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
0
GPT-5 mini only
1
MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
13
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Directional only
GPT-5 mini
42.3
Estimated · #114/151
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
40.8
Supported · #118/151
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 5 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Directional only
GPT-5 mini
41.4
Estimated · #133/183
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
57.1
Estimated · #36/183
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable
GPT-5 mini
Not ranked
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
76.9
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
GPT-5 mini
Not ranked
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
55.5
Supported · #58/181
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-5 mini
Not ranked
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-5 mini
Not ranked
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
GPT-5 mini
Not ranked
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-5 mini
Not ranked
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
93.5
#6/120
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5 mini
$0.00125
Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
API rate not published
Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5-Pro has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5 mini
$0.0185
Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
API rate not published
Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5-Pro has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5 mini
$0.075
Does not fit in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

GPT-5 mini does not fit this workload in one request. GPT-5 mini has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

GPT-5 mini

128K

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

1M

API model ID

GPT-5 mini

Not sourced

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

GPT-5 mini

Not published

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

GPT-5 mini

Not sourced

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Not sourced

Documented outputs

GPT-5 mini

Not sourced

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Not sourced

Provider availability

GPT-5 mini

Not sourced

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-5 mini

Reasoning

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-5 mini

Proprietary

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Proprietary

License

GPT-5 mini

Proprietary

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Proprietary

Release date

GPT-5 mini

2025-08-07

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

2026-04-22

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence14 rows

Agentic

  • Claw-Eval

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro63.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro72.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Gert Labs

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro62.70%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • Vibe Code Bench

    GPT-5 mini14.17%
    Source
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench (Vals)

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro81.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro74.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • HLE

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro48%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro34%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro82.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    GPT-5 mini
    MiMo-V2.5-Pro84.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

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

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

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

MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher for coding on the public lane, 57.1 to 41.4. GPT-5 mini and MiMo-V2.5-Pro are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5 mini or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

GPT-5 mini scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 42.3 to 40.8. GPT-5 mini is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, GPT-5 mini or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-5 mini or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 128K.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 4, 2026

Watch GPT-5 mini vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.