Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
MiMo-V2-Flash
59
Ornith-1.0-397B
96
Pick Ornith-1.0-397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Coding
+9.0 difference
MiMo-V2-Flash
Ornith-1.0-397B
$0 / $0
$0 / $0
129 t/s
N/A
2.14s
N/A
256K
262K
Pick Ornith-1.0-397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Ornith-1.0-397B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 96 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Ornith-1.0-397B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 82.4 against 73.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.4% to 82.4%.
Ornith-1.0-397B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
Ornith-1.0-397B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 96 to 59. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.4% and 82.4%.
Ornith-1.0-397B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 82.4 versus 73.4. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.