Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 6 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Sibling matchup inside the MiMo-V2.5 family.
Public leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2.5 #62 (Estimated); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MiMo-V2.5 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 6 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to MiMo-V2.5; 25 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 6
- MiMo-V2.5 only
- 5
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 25
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
MiMo-V2.5 makes more sense if you want this variant’s specific profile, while MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the cleaner fit if agentic is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 6 shared benchmark results across 3 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 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro sit in the same MiMo-V2.5 family. This page is less about two unrelated model lineages and more about how the siblings trade off on benchmark shape, token costs, and practical limits like context window.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 70.19 to 58.62. 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 65.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 65.8% to 68.4%.
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 | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | MiMo-V2.565.8 | Margin→ 2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Coding | MiMo-V2.556.1 | Margin→ 1.1 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
| Knowledge | MiMo-V2.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
| Multimodal | MiMo-V2.579.0 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 65.8%B 68.4%Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 2.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: MiMo-V2.5 scored 65.8%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 68.4%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 56.1%B 57.2%Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 1.1SWE-bench Pro: MiMo-V2.5 scored 56.1%; 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 | MiMo-V2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiMo-V2.5Not available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiMo-V2.5Not available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiMo-V2.5Not available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiMo-V2.51M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticMiMo-V2.5-Pro wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 62.3% | 63.8% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| MM-ClawBenchSource | 23.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 65.8% | 68.4% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 46.89% | 62.70% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 16.9% | — | 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 |
| 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 |
CodingMiMo-V2.5-Pro wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | 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 |
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 79.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, MiMo-V2.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro are sibling variants in the MiMo-V2.5 family, so the right pick depends on whether you value the better benchmark line, cheaper tokens, or the larger context window. MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard 70.19 to 58.62.
Which is better for coding, MiMo-V2.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 57.2 versus 56.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, MiMo-V2.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.4 versus 65.8. Inside this category, Gert Labs 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.