Qwen3 Coder Next vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Updated October 21, 2026. 10 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a coding score, 31.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Coder Next has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Qwen3 Coder Next has the edge where output tokens cost 1.1x less.
- Shared results
- 10
- Qwen3 Coder Next only
- 1
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 60
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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-Pro has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads, 26.0 against 9.2.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads, 21.3 against 0.9.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a GPQA Diamond result, 82.6%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a MMLU Pro result, 84.6%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a Design Arena: websites result, 1267.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next
Qwen3 Coder Next $0.0005, MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.0009 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the number, $0.03.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3 Coder Next not benchmarked, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 31.6 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- General, 38.6 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- IFBench: Qwen3 Coder Next 35.2% against MiMo-V2.5-Pro 79.9%, 44.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3 Coder Next $0.80 against MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.9152 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen3 Coder Next takes 262K 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.
| Category | Qwen3 Coder Next | Bars | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 3 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 10 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1480 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| AA Coding Index | 36.2 | 60.2 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 81.3% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 74.0% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 34.1% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 21.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.3% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| SciCode | 36.2% | 50.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 18.2% | 43.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| WeirdML | 34.4% | Not measured | Only Qwen3 Coder Next measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 899.8 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1501 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1495 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1469 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1473 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 9.2 | 26.0 | MiMo-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
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 0.9 | 21.3 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 41.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 11.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 15.9% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 55.2% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 79.5% | 94.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 82.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 73.7% | 86.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 10.1% | 35.7% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1486 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1501 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1494 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | Not measured | 22.0% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1481 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1491 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 84.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 77.1% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 61.4% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 73.8% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 32.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1482 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1473 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1474 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1466 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1267 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1248 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1261 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1257 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1244 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1266 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1181 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1157 | Only 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 index02
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 83.7% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| IFBench | 35.2% | 79.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 47.0% | 79.7% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| DTBench | Not measured | 84.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 29.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1464 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1475 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1438 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1477 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1448 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1507 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1459 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1410 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1435 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1487 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1469 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1449 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1464 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1476 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1481 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1451 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1438 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| 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
| Benchmark | Qwen3 Coder Next | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | 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
Qwen3 Coder Next costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 Coder Next 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 Coder Next | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Xiaomi |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | February 4, 2026 | April 22, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.12 | $0.4575 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.80 | $0.9152 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 31.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.03 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3 Coder Next better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro for coding?
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a coding score, 31.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Coder Next has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Qwen3 Coder Next has the edge where output tokens cost 1.1x less.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 Coder Next or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Qwen3 Coder Next costs $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 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, Qwen3 Coder Next or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3 Coder Next vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro comparison based on?
10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Qwen3 Coder Next'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.