Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
27
MiMo-V2.5
72
Pick MiMo-V2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Coding
+18.9 difference
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
MiMo-V2.5
N/A
$null / $null
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
128K
1M
Pick MiMo-V2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
MiMo-V2.5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 72 to 27. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 56.1 against 37.2.
MiMo-V2.5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct 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 128K for Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct.
MiMo-V2.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 72 to 27.
MiMo-V2.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 56.1 versus 37.2. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.