Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5 vs Mistral Medium 3.5 128B
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2.5 #69 (Estimated); Mistral Medium 3.5 128B unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MiMo-V2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to MiMo-V2.5; 24 to Mistral Medium 3.5 128B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- MiMo-V2.5 only
- 10
- Mistral Medium 3.5 128B only
- 24
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. MiMo-V2.5 makes more sense if you need the larger 1M context window; Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is the better fit if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 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 Mistral Medium 3.5 128B 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.
MiMo-V2.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Mistral Medium 3.5 128B.
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 | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | MiMo-V2.556.1 | Margin→ 21.5 | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B77.6 |
| Agentic | MiMo-V2.565.8 | MarginNo overlap | Mistral Medium 3.5 128BNot measured |
| Multimodal | MiMo-V2.579.0 | MarginNo overlap | Mistral Medium 3.5 128BNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | MiMo-V2.5 | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiMo-V2.5Not available | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B$1.5 input / $7.5 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiMo-V2.5Not available | Mistral Medium 3.5 128BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiMo-V2.5Not available | Mistral Medium 3.5 128BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiMo-V2.51M | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B256K | MiMo-V2.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 62.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MM-ClawBenchSource | 23.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 65.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 46.89% | 39.10% | MiMo-V2.5 leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 16.9% | — | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 91.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 19.0% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 94.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 21.6% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 933 | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 33.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 69.1% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 516 | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 14.4% | Not comparable |
CodingMistral Medium 3.5 128B wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 29.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 74.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 12.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -36.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 25.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 82.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Mistral Medium 3.5 128B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 68.8% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, MiMo-V2.5 or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?
MiMo-V2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B 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, MiMo-V2.5 or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.6 versus 56.1. MiMo-V2.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.