Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
LongCat-2.0
80
MiMo-V2.5
70
Pick LongCat-2.0 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Agentic
+5.0 difference
Coding
+3.4 difference
LongCat-2.0
MiMo-V2.5
$0.75 / $2.95
$null / $null
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
1M
Pick LongCat-2.0 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
LongCat-2.0 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 80 to 70. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
LongCat-2.0's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 70.8 against 65.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 70.8% to 65.8%.
LongCat-2.0 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 80 to 70. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 70.8% and 65.8%.
LongCat-2.0 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 59.5 versus 56.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
LongCat-2.0 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.8 versus 65.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 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.