Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs MiniMax M3
Head-to-head evidence from 24 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2.5-Pro unranked; MiniMax M3 #18
BenchAlign evidence: MiMo-V2.5-Pro supported; MiniMax M3 supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MiMo-V2.5-Pro and MiniMax M3 share 24 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to MiMo-V2.5-Pro; 21 to MiniMax M3.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 24
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 6
- MiniMax M3 only
- 21
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiniMax M3 only becomes the better choice if coding 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 24 shared benchmark results across 6 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
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 73 versus 70. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M3 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.
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 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Δ | MiniMax M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 | Margin→ 15.0 | MiniMax M372.2 |
| Agentic | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 | Margin→ 3.9 | MiniMax M372.3 |
| Knowledge | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
| Math | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M385.7 |
| Multimodal | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M364.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 68.4%B 66%Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 2.4Terminal-Bench 2.0: MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 68.4%; MiniMax M3 scored 66%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 57.2%B 59%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 1.8SWE-bench Pro: MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 57.2%; MiniMax M3 scored 59%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax M3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | MiniMax M31M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticMiniMax M3 wins20 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 63.8% | 74.5% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1265 | 1395 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | 72.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 68.4% | 66% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 29.1% | 35.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 94.2% | 88.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 38.3% | 44.7% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 2.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 62.70% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 873 | 1110 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA ITBenchSource | 38.2% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 83.5% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 70.1% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval rubricsSource | — | 74.7% | Not comparable |
| BankerToolBenchSource | — | 76.1% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 19.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 4.6% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 32.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 6.7% | Not comparable |
CodingMiniMax M3 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.2% | 59% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 68.4% | 66.0% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 60.2% | 58.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 43.2% | 42.4% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 50.2% | 45.4% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | 65.2% | 65.2% | Tie |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| VIBE V2Source | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
| SVG-BenchSource | — | 63.7% | Not comparable |
| KernelBench HardSource | — | 28.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | 48% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 34% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 42.2% | 44.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 86.6% | 92.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 33.8% | 37.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 3.6% | 1.4% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 22.6% | 15.0% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 24.5% | 16.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 38.9% | 33.3% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAMO 2026Source | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
Multimodal7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1302 | 1294 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 45.1% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 91.6% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.1% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.6% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.6% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 79.9% | 82.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or MiniMax M3?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 73 to 70. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 68.4% and 66%.
Which is better for coding, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 57.2. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 72.3 versus 68.4. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.