Model comparison
Holo3-35B-A3B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
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: Holo3-35B-A3B unranked (Not scored); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Holo3-35B-A3B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Holo3-35B-A3B; 31 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Holo3-35B-A3B only
- 1
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 31
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Holo3-35B-A3B 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-Pro 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
Holo3-35B-A3B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-35B-A3B 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-Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-35B-A3B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Holo3-35B-A3B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Holo3-35B-A3BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Holo3-35B-A3B64K | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticHolo3-35B-A3B wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-35B-A3B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 82.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1265 | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 68.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 29.1% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 94.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 38.3% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 2.4% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 62.70% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 873 | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 38.2% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 43.2% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 73.3% | Not comparable |
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-35B-A3B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | — | 48% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 34% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 42.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 86.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 33.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 3.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 22.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 24.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-35B-A3B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1298 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-35B-A3B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 79.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Holo3-35B-A3B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Holo3-35B-A3B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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, Holo3-35B-A3B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Holo3-35B-A3B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.6 versus 68.4. MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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.