Model comparison
Holo3-122B-A10B vs MiMo-V2.5
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Holo3-122B-A10B unranked (Not scored); MiMo-V2.5 #62 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Holo3-122B-A10B and MiMo-V2.5 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Holo3-122B-A10B; 11 to MiMo-V2.5.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Holo3-122B-A10B only
- 1
- MiMo-V2.5 only
- 11
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Holo3-122B-A10B makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; MiMo-V2.5 is the better fit if you need the larger 1M context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Holo3-122B-A10B and MiMo-V2.5 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
MiMo-V2.5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-122B-A10B 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 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Holo3-122B-A10B | MiMo-V2.5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Holo3-122B-A10B$0.4 input / $3 output | MiMo-V2.5Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | MiMo-V2.5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | MiMo-V2.5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Holo3-122B-A10B64K | MiMo-V2.51M | MiMo-V2.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticHolo3-122B-A10B wins6 benchmarks
Coding2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Holo3-122B-A10B or MiMo-V2.5?
Holo3-122B-A10B and MiMo-V2.5 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Holo3-122B-A10B or MiMo-V2.5?
Holo3-122B-A10B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.9 versus 65.8. MiMo-V2.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
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.