Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2 vs MiMo-V2.5

MiMo-V2.5 leads Mercury 2 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.8 to 10.8, and MiMo-V2.5 costs 2.2x less per output token ($0.336 vs $0.75 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 41 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.75
2
MiMo-V2.5Xiaomi
Coding
50.0
Overall
50.7
Output $/M
$0.336
39
vs boards won of 41 shared

Mercury 2 or MiMo-V2.5: which to pick

Only MiMo-V2.5 has a coding score, 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mercury 2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Mercury 2 for work measured by ALE-Bench or IFBench, where it leads.

Shared results
41
Mercury 2 only
1
MiMo-V2.5 only
39
Like-for-like categories
7 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
Mercury 2 not benchmarked, MiMo-V2.5 50.0 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Web design, 28.1 points apart on average over 8 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: React: Mercury 2 1160 against MiMo-V2.5 1425, 44.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mercury 2 $0.75 against MiMo-V2.5 $0.336 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2 takes 128K 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
CategoryMercury 2BarsMiMo-V2.5Ties
Coding18
Intelligence01
Agentic work02
Reasoning05
Knowledge03
Web design08
General112
All shared boards239
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index18
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5Leader
LMArena WebDev11711438MiMo-V2.5
AA Coding Index31.156.8MiMo-V2.5
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.5%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured71.0%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured42.2%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
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
SciCode37.7%43.9%MiMo-V2.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%41.7%MiMo-V2.5
WeirdML43.2%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
ALE-Bench785.6514.0Mercury 2
LMArena Text: coding13901469MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: software and IT13851463MiMo-V2.5
LMArena WebDev: React11601425MiMo-V2.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML11991429MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.821.8MiMo-V2.5
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 Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5Leader
AA Agentic Index1.615.8MiMo-V2.5
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 Telecom70.8%90.6%MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-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)77.0%84.9%MiMo-V2.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%27.2%MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts13621450MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: expert13581459MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13741461MiMo-V2.5
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 index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5Leader
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 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-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
LMArena Text: science13431440MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13631432MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1425Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance13491432MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites10361265MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: UI components9961255MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: game dev9841249MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: data viz10091250MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: 3D9821215MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: all code categories10211260MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: SVG9981179MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: ASCII art9881140MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index112
General benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-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
IFBench69.8%67.1%Mercury 2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)43.7%73.0%MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text13541428MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: instruction following13281435MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: creative writing12861393MiMo-V2.5
LMArena VisionNot measured1247Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: English13781447MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: non-English13301405MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: Chinese14141469MiMo-V2.5
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: Russian13041396MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1413Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13571445MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: longer queries13291445MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: writing and language13001409MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13141399MiMo-V2.5
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 Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-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

Mercury 2$0.0006Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.0003Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.0094Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window
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 Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5
SpecificationInception Mercury 2Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5
MakerInceptionXiaomi
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 4, 2026April 22, 2026
Context window128K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.168
Output $/Mtok$0.75$0.336
Coding indexNot benchmarked50.0
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.01
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2 better than MiMo-V2.5 for coding?

Only MiMo-V2.5 has a coding score, 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mercury 2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mercury 2 for work measured by ALE-Bench or IFBench, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or MiMo-V2.5?

Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.168 and $0.336. Cost per solved task is known for MiMo-V2.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs MiMo-V2.5 comparison based on?

41 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark 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