Model comparison
Kimi K2.5 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 23 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.5 #54 (Supported); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Kimi K2.5 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 23 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 40 results are unique to Kimi K2.5; 8 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 23
- Kimi K2.5 only
- 40
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 8
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.5 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 23 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 70.19 to 59.66. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 68.4 against 55. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 30.1% to 48%. Kimi K2.5 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while Kimi K2.5 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 256K for Kimi K2.5.
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 | Kimi K2.5 | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Kimi K2.555.0 | Margin→ 13.4 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Knowledge | Kimi K2.556.9 | Margin← 8.9 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
| Coding | Kimi K2.559.4 | Margin← 2.2 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
| Reasoning | Kimi K2.561.0 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Math | Kimi K2.560.6 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Multilingual | Kimi K2.582.3 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Multimodal | Kimi K2.578.5 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Kimi K2.593.9 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 30.1%B 48%Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 17.9HLE: Kimi K2.5 scored 30.1%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 48%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 50.8%B 68.4%Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 17.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K2.5 scored 50.8%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 68.4%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 50.7%B 57.2%Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 6.5SWE-bench Pro: Kimi K2.5 scored 50.7%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 57.2%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Kimi K2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Kimi K2.5$0.6 input / $3 output | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Kimi K2.545 tok/s | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Kimi K2.52.38 s | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Kimi K2.5256K | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticMiMo-V2.5-Pro wins24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 50.8% | 68.4% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 52.3% | 63.8% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 54.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 65.7% | 72.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| DeepSearchQASource | 77.1% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | 14.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 27.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 29.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP-TasksSource | 59.1% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 72.7% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | 94.2% | Kimi K2.5 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 11.5% | 2.4% | Kimi K2.5 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 45.88% | 62.70% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 14.0% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 8.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 21.7% | 29.1% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 25.4% | 38.3% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1009 | 1265 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| 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 |
CodingKimi K2.5 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 76.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench Verified*Source | 70.8% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 85.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 50.7% | 57.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 73% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-RebenchSource | 58.5% | — | Not comparable |
| React Native EvalsSource | 77.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | 48.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 49.0% | 50.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 46.8% | 60.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 68.4% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeKimi K2.5 wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | 69.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 30.1% | 48% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 35.4% | 42.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.9% | 86.6% | Kimi K2.5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 29.4% | 33.8% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -8.1% | 3.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 34.3% | 22.6% | Kimi K2.5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 64.6% | 24.5% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 34% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
Math9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | 96.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AIME26Source | 95.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AIME25 (Arcee)Source | 96.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2025Source | 95.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Nov 2025Source | 91.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MMAnswerBenchSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 27.900% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | 4.200% | — | Not comparable |
Multilingual2 benchmarks
Multimodal6 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Kimi K2.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 70.19 to 59.66. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 30.1% and 48%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K2.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Kimi K2.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 56.9 versus 48. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Kimi K2.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 59.4 versus 57.2. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.4 versus 55. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
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.