MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen3.5 397B

Pick Qwen3.5 397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Qwen3.5 397B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 63 to 59. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.5 397B is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for MiMo-V2-Flash. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. MiMo-V2-Flash is the reasoning model in the pair, while Qwen3.5 397B is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. MiMo-V2-Flash gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Qwen3.5 397B.