Model comparison
Laguna S 2.1 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Laguna S 2.1 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. Laguna S 2.1 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 3 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Laguna S 2.1; 28 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- Laguna S 2.1 only
- 3
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 28
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Laguna S 2.1 makes more sense if coding is the priority; MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the better fit if its strengths line up with your actual workload.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Laguna S 2.1 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.
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 | Laguna S 2.1 | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Laguna S 2.159.4 | Margin← 2.2 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
| Agentic | Laguna S 2.170.2 | Margin← 1.8 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Knowledge | Laguna S 2.1Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 59.4%B 57.2%Winner: Laguna S 2.1Δ 2.2SWE-bench Pro: Laguna S 2.1 scored 59.4%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 57.2%. Laguna S 2.1 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 70.2%B 68.4%Winner: Laguna S 2.1Δ 1.8Terminal-Bench 2.0: Laguna S 2.1 scored 70.2%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 68.4%. Laguna S 2.1 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Laguna S 2.1 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Laguna S 2.1$0.1 input / $0.2 output | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Laguna S 2.1Not available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Laguna S 2.1Not available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Laguna S 2.11M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticLaguna S 2.1 wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna S 2.1 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 70.2% | 68.4% | Laguna S 2.1 leads |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | 49.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1265 | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 72.9% | 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 |
CodingLaguna S 2.1 wins6 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna S 2.1 | 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 | Laguna S 2.1 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1298 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna S 2.1 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 79.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Laguna S 2.1 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Laguna S 2.1 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 coding, Laguna S 2.1 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Laguna S 2.1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 59.4 versus 57.2. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Laguna S 2.1 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Laguna S 2.1 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.2 versus 68.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.