Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs MiMo-V2.5
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads MiMo-V2.5 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 39.9 to 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 costs 5.4x less per output token ($1.119 vs $6.00 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or MiMo-V2.5: which to pick
Only MiMo-V2.5 has a coding score, 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 7
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B only
- 2
- MiMo-V2.5 only
- 73
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads, 39.9 against 21.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads, 50.1 against 15.8.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5 has a GPQA Diamond result, 81.6%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5 has a MMLU Pro result, 82.9%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1266.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
MiMo-V2.5
MiMo-V2.5 takes 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
MiMo-V2.5
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $0.0050, MiMo-V2.5 $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5 has the number, $0.01.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B not benchmarked, MiMo-V2.5 50.0 from 3 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 34.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Agentic Index: Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 50.1 against MiMo-V2.5 15.8, 34.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $6.00 against MiMo-V2.5 $1.119 per million output tokens, 5.4x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B takes 1.05M 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.
| Category | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Bars | MiMo-V2.5 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 7 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1438 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| AA Coding Index | 71.9 | 56.8 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 81.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.0% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 42.2% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 14.2% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 60.7% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| SciCode | 54.1% | 43.9% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 41.7% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 514.0 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1469 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1463 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1425 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1430 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 39.9 | 21.8 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 50.1 | 15.8 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 36.7% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 7.8% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 9.1% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 55.1% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 90.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| MCP Atlas | 84.5% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 81.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 80.0% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 93.5% | 84.9% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 42.4% | 27.2% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1450 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1459 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1461 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1269 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1262 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | Not measured | 16.0% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1437 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1451 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| MathArena | 31.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 82.9% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 78.9% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 59.9% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.8% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 59.3% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 31.9% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1440 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1432 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1425 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1432 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1266 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1255 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1249 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1250 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1217 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1260 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1180 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1140 | Only 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 index10
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 43.3% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.2% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Vals Multimodal Index | Not measured | 52.8% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 67.1% | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 80.3% | 73.0% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1428 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1435 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1393 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1247 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1447 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1405 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1469 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1422 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1306 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1361 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1448 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1414 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1396 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1412 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1445 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1445 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1409 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1399 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1259 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1326 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1256 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1226 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | Not measured | 1189 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1230 | Only MiMo-V2.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | MiMo-V2.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
MiMo-V2.5 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
MiMo-V2.5 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Xiaomi |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | August 12, 2026 | April 22, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.00 | $0.2595 |
| Output $/Mtok | $6.00 | $1.119 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 50.0 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 3 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.01 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B better than MiMo-V2.5 for coding?
Only MiMo-V2.5 has a coding score, 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or MiMo-V2.5?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $6.00 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.2595 and $1.119. Cost per solved task is known for MiMo-V2.5 only.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs MiMo-V2.5 comparison based on?
7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B's coding index rests on 0 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.