Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok Code Fast 1
42
MiMo-V2-Flash
62
Pick MiMo-V2-Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+2.6 difference
Grok Code Fast 1
MiMo-V2-Flash
$null / $null
$0 / $0
172 t/s
129 t/s
2.81s
2.14s
256K
256K
Pick MiMo-V2-Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
MiMo-V2-Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 62 to 42. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2-Flash's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 73.4 against 70.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 70.8% to 73.4%.
MiMo-V2-Flash is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok Code Fast 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-Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 62 to 42. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 70.8% and 73.4%.
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 70.8. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified 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.