Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5 vs Muse Spark
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2.5 #62 (Estimated); Muse Spark #13 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MiMo-V2.5 and Muse Spark share 5 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to MiMo-V2.5; 34 to Muse Spark.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- MiMo-V2.5 only
- 6
- Muse Spark only
- 34
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Muse Spark if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Muse Spark is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 71.04 to 58.62. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Muse Spark's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 67.8 against 56.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 65.8% to 59%. MiMo-V2.5 does hit back in agentic, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
MiMo-V2.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Muse Spark.
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 | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | MiMo-V2.556.1 | Margin→ 11.7 | Muse Spark67.8 |
| Agentic | MiMo-V2.565.8 | Margin← 6.8 | Muse Spark59.0 |
| Multimodal | MiMo-V2.579.0 | Margin→ 3.5 | Muse Spark82.5 |
| Reasoning | MiMo-V2.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Muse Spark42.5 |
| Knowledge | MiMo-V2.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Muse Spark50.4 |
| Math | MiMo-V2.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Muse Spark32.9 |
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 59%Winner: MiMo-V2.5Δ 6.8Terminal-Bench 2.0: MiMo-V2.5 scored 65.8%; Muse Spark scored 59%. MiMo-V2.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 81%B 86.4%Winner: Muse SparkΔ 5.4CharXiv: MiMo-V2.5 scored 81%; Muse Spark scored 86.4%. Muse Spark wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 56.1%B 52.4%Winner: MiMo-V2.5Δ 3.7SWE-bench Pro: MiMo-V2.5 scored 56.1%; Muse Spark scored 52.4%. MiMo-V2.5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 77.9%B 80.4%Winner: Muse SparkΔ 2.5MMMU-Pro: MiMo-V2.5 scored 77.9%; Muse Spark scored 80.4%. Muse Spark wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | MiMo-V2.5 | Muse Spark | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiMo-V2.5Not available | Muse SparkNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiMo-V2.5Not available | Muse SparkNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiMo-V2.5Not available | Muse SparkNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiMo-V2.51M | Muse Spark262K | MiMo-V2.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticMiMo-V2.5 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 62.3% | 63.8% | Muse Spark leads |
| MM-ClawBenchSource | 23.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 65.8% | 59% | MiMo-V2.5 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 46.89% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 16.9% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 91.5% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 74.8% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 43.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 28.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 32.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1144 | Not comparable |
CodingMuse Spark wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 56.1% | 52.4% | MiMo-V2.5 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 65.8% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 77.4% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | — | 80.0% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 19.67% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 58.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 51.5% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA-DSource | — | 89.5% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 50.4% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 42.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 42.8% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 52.6% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 43.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 88.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 39.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 4.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 44.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
MultimodalMuse Spark wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | 87.7% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 81% | 86.4% | Muse Spark leads |
| MMMU-ProSource | 77.9% | 80.4% | Muse Spark leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1291 | — | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 71.3% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 84.1% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 33.0% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 78.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 75.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, MiMo-V2.5 or Muse Spark?
Muse Spark is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 71.04 to 58.62. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 65.8% and 59%.
Which is better for coding, MiMo-V2.5 or Muse Spark?
Muse Spark has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 67.8 versus 56.1. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, MiMo-V2.5 or Muse Spark?
MiMo-V2.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.8 versus 59. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, MiMo-V2.5 or Muse Spark?
Muse Spark has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.5 versus 79. Inside this category, CharXiv 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.