Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Xiaomi

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs MiMo-V2-Flash

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct wins:

  • No clear advantages in compared metrics

MiMo-V2-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Benchmark Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Context Window
MiMo-V2-Flash
Speed
MiMo-V2-Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen2.5 72B InstructMiMo-V2-Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen2.5 72B InstructMiMo-V2-Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenXiaomi
ReleasedSep 2024Dec 2025

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

MiMo-V2-Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

MiMo-V2-Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.09/M tokens. MiMo-V2-Flash has cheaper output pricing at $0.29/M tokens.
MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 25.8, compared to Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's score of 11.9.
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has a 32,768 token context window, while MiMo-V2-Flash has a 262,144 token context window.
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct does not support vision. MiMo-V2-Flash does not support vision.