MiMo V2 Omni vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Wins 1 of 7 areas
Agents
Wins 5 of 7 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Images and charts · Long documents · Following instructions
Qwen3.5 397B A17B is the stronger all-rounder.MiMo V2 Omni is cheaper and better at agents.
Scores updated · 19 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software03Qwen3.5 397B A17B3 of 3 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02Qwen3.5 397B A17B2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video02Qwen3.5 397B A17B2 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Qwen3.5 397B A17B1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.5 397B A17B1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10MiMo V2 Omni1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Agents, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
MiMo V2 Omni costs 43% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.5 397B A17B pulls ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+25.3points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+11.5points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+8.1points ahead
Where MiMo V2 Omni pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+40points ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+26.1points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 19 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3.5 397B A17B
- SciCodeQwen3.5 397B A17B by 8.136.744.8+8.1
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3.5 397B A17B by 6.134.840.9+6.1
- SWE-bench VerifiedQwen3.5 397B A17B by 1.674.876.4+1.6
ReasoningQwen3.5 397B A17B
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3.5 397B A17B by 6.922.129+6.9
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.5 397B A17B by 6.582.889.3+6.5
- CritPttie1.11.7tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationMiMo V2 Omni by 4051.111.1+40
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyQwen3.5 397B A17B by 11.519.330.8+11.5
Images and chartsQwen3.5 397B A17B
- MMMU-ProQwen3.5 397B A17B by 7.469.977.3+7.4
- LMArena · VisionQwen3.5 397B A17B by 36 rating points12281264+36 rating
Following instructionsQwen3.5 397B A17B
- IFBenchQwen3.5 397B A17B by 25.353.578.8+25.3
Other results6 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA Agentic IndexMiMo V2 Omni by 4858.610.6+48
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3.5 397B A17B by 12.735.548.2+12.7
- AA-OmniscienceMiMo V2 Omni by 10.6-20.1-30.8+10.6
- AA IntelligenceMiMo V2 Omni by 5.523.918.4+5.5
- PinchBenchQwen3.5 397B A17B by 5.481.286.6+5.4
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.5 397B A17B by 4.491.295.6+4.4
Questions people ask
Which is better, MiMo V2 Omni or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins five of the seven areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, images and charts, long documents and following instructions. MiMo V2 Omni wins agents, and costs 43% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.5 397B A17B. It wins 3 of the 3 coding tests both models report; MiMo V2 Omni wins none.
Which is cheaper?
MiMo V2 Omni costs $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs $0.60 and $3.60. That makes MiMo V2 Omni about 43% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 19 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 13 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 6 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.