Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
MiMo-V2-Flash
60
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
56
Verified leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2-Flash unranked · Qwen3.5-35B-A3B #18
Pick MiMo-V2-Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window.
Coding
+15.0 difference
Knowledge
+5.2 difference
MiMo-V2-Flash
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
$0 / $0
$0 / $0
129 t/s
N/A
2.14s
N/A
256K
262K
Pick MiMo-V2-Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window.
MiMo-V2-Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 60 to 56. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2-Flash's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 73.4 against 58.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.4% to 69.2%.
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
MiMo-V2-Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 60 to 56. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.4% and 69.2%.
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.5 versus 79.3. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 58.4. 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.