Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1-Codex vs MiMo-V2.5

MiMo-V2.5 leads GPT-5.1-Codex on coding, 50.0 to 15.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, and MiMo-V2.5 costs 29.8x less per output token ($0.336 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 17 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.1-CodexOpenAI
Coding
15.3
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
5
MiMo-V2.5Xiaomi
Coding
50.0
Overall
50.7
Output $/M
$0.336
12
vs boards won of 17 shared

GPT-5.1-Codex or MiMo-V2.5: which to pick

Pick MiMo-V2.5 for coding: it scores 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 15.3 for GPT-5.1-Codex.

Pick GPT-5.1-Codex for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.

Shared results
17
GPT-5.1-Codex only
9
MiMo-V2.5 only
63
Like-for-like categories
6 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
GPT-5.1-Codex 15.3 from 2 benchmarks, MiMo-V2.5 50.0 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 15.4 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-5.1-Codex 13.1% against MiMo-V2.5 42.2%, 29.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1-Codex $10.00 against MiMo-V2.5 $0.336 per million output tokens, 29.8x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1-Codex takes 400K tokens, MiMo-V2.5 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
CategoryGPT-5.1-CodexBarsMiMo-V2.5Ties
Coding24
Intelligence10
Agentic work01
Reasoning11
Web design05
General11
All shared boards512
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index24
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
SWE-bench Verified66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev13371438MiMo-V2.5
AA Coding IndexNot measured56.8Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.5%81.5%GPT-5.1-Codex
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured71.0%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)13.1%42.2%MiMo-V2.5
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured14.2%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured60.7%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)84.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
SciCodeNot measured43.9%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)34.8%41.7%MiMo-V2.5
Terminal-Bench57.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1244.9514.0GPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1469Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1463Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1425Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13461429MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index23.721.8GPT-5.1-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured15.8Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1018Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1086Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1191Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured36.7%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured7.8%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured9.1%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured55.1%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom83.0%90.6%MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured81.6%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured80.0%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%84.9%GPT-5.1-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)25.7%27.2%MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1450Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1459Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1461Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1269Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1262Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
AA Math Index95.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)95.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
ProofBenchNot measured16.0%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1436Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1451Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured82.9%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured78.9%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured59.9%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.8%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured59.3%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured31.9%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1-Codex measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1440Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1432Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1425Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1432Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites11611265MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: UI components12341255MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: game dev11371249MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: data viz12131250MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1215Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories11521260MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1179Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1140Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured43.3%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured72.2%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured52.8%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
IFBench70.0%67.1%GPT-5.1-Codex
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%73.0%MiMo-V2.5
LMArena TextNot measured1428Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1435Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1393Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1247Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1447Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1405Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1469Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1421Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1306Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1361Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1448Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1414Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1396Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1413Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1445Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1445Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1409Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1399Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1259Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1326Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1256Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1226Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1189Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1230Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.1-CodexMiMo-V2.5Leader
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

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.0063Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.0003Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.092Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.0094Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1-Codex$0.350Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.037Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 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 GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.5
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1-CodexXiaomi MiMo-V2.5
MakerOpenAIXiaomi
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025April 22, 2026
Context window400K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.168
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.336
Coding index15.350.0
Independent measurements behind it23
Cost per solved task$0.892$0.01
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than MiMo-V2.5 for coding?

Pick MiMo-V2.5 for coding: it scores 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 15.3 for GPT-5.1-Codex. Pick GPT-5.1-Codex for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex or MiMo-V2.5?

GPT-5.1-Codex costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.168 and $0.336. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.1-Codex costs $0.892 and MiMo-V2.5 $0.01.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1-Codex or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1-Codex vs MiMo-V2.5 comparison based on?

17 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.1-Codex's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and MiMo-V2.5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-1-codex-vs-xiaomi-mimo-v2-5" title="GPT-5.1-Codex vs MiMo-V2.5, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-1-codex-vs-xiaomi-mimo-v2-5">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.1-Codex vs MiMo-V2.5</a></p>