Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.0 to 14.8, at about the same output price ($0.9152 vs $1.0142 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 40 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus Replace MiMo-V2.5-Pro
DeepSeek V3.1 TerminusDeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.0142
0
MiMo-V2.5-ProXiaomi
Coding
31.6
Overall
39.3
Output $/M
$0.9152
40
vs boards won of 40 shared

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or MiMo-V2.5-Pro: which to pick

Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a coding score, 31.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Model ADeepSeek V3.1 TerminusDeepSeekNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMiMo-V2.5-ProXiaomi31.6/1004 independent benchmarks$0.03 per solved task
Shared results
40
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus only
5
MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
30
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus not benchmarked, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 31.6 from 4 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 35.8 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 37.1% against MiMo-V2.5-Pro 94.2%, 57.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus $1.0142 against MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.9152 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus takes 164K tokens, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusBarsMiMo-V2.5-ProTies
Coding06
Intelligence01
Agentic work02
Reasoning04
Math01
Knowledge04
Web design07
General015
All shared boards040
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index06
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1480Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
AA Coding Index43.560.2MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.3%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.0%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured34.1%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured21.6%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured57.3%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)79.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
SciCode38.0%50.6%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%43.2%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
ALE-Bench745.2899.8MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: coding14251501MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: software and IT14261495MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1469Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1473Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
AA Intelligence Index14.826.0MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
AA Agentic Index6.821.3MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured41.5%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured11.5%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured15.9%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured55.2%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
τ²-Bench Telecom37.1%94.2%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured82.6%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%86.6%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)16.4%35.7%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: hard prompts14261486MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1501Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14321494MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
AA Math Index89.7Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)89.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
ProofBenchNot measured22.0%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: math14021481MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1491Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
MMLU ProNot measured84.6%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured77.1%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured61.4%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured73.8%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured32.5%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: science14511482MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14681473MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: legal and government14571474MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: business and finance14141466MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
Design Arena: websites11871266MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Design Arena: UI components11821246MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Design Arena: game dev11311261MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Design Arena: data viz11681257MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Design Arena: 3D11411243MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Design Arena: all code categories11751265MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Design Arena: SVG10651181MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1156Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index015
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured83.7%Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
IFBench57.0%79.9%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%79.7%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
DTBench81.3%84.5%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMCA28.6%29.5%MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text14191464MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: instruction following14041475MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: creative writing14031438MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: English14291477MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: non-English14081448MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1507Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1459Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1410Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1435Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1487Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1469Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured
LMArena Text: Russian14351449MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: Polish14271464MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: multi-turn14111476MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: longer queries14221481MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: writing and language14091451MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13911438MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2.5-ProLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.0008Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5-Pro$0.0009Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.018Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5-Pro$0.026Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.071Exceeds the context window
MiMo-V2.5-Pro$0.101Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusXiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MakerDeepSeekXiaomi
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2025April 22, 2026
Context window164K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.3063$0.4575
Output $/Mtok$1.0142$0.9152
Coding indexNot benchmarked31.6
Independent measurements behind it04
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.03
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro for coding?

Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a coding score, 31.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs $0.3063 per million input tokens and $1.0142 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs $0.4575 and $0.9152. Cost per solved task is known for MiMo-V2.5-Pro only.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro comparison based on?

40 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and MiMo-V2.5-Pro's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next