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

OpenClaw

Best LLMs for OpenClaw Vote for which model works best with OpenClaw

112 out of our 301 tracked models have had a price change in February.

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

Key Takeaways

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct wins:

  • Supports tool calls

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
Price Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Benchmark Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Context Window
MiMo-V2-Flash
Speed
MiMo-V2-Flash

Pricing Comparison

Price Comparison

MetricQwen2.5 72B InstructMiMo-V2-FlashWinner
Input (per 1M tokens)$0.12$0.09 MiMo-V2-Flash
Output (per 1M tokens)$0.39$0.29 MiMo-V2-Flash
Cache Read (per 1M)N/A$45000.00 MiMo-V2-Flash
Using a 3:1 input/output ratio, MiMo-V2-Flash is 25% cheaper overall.

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Providers

DeepInfra $0.12 (Cheapest)
Chutes $0.30
Novita $0.38
Hyperbolic $0.40

MiMo-V2-Flash Providers

Chutes $0.09 (Cheapest)
AtlasCloud $0.10
Xiaomi $0.10
Novita $0.10

Benchmark Comparison

8
Benchmarks Compared
0
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct Wins
6
MiMo-V2-Flash Wins

Benchmark Scores

BenchmarkQwen2.5 72B InstructMiMo-V2-FlashWinner
Intelligence Index
Overall intelligence score
15.630.6
Coding Index
Code generation & understanding
11.925.8
Math Index
Mathematical reasoning
14.067.7
MMLU Pro
Academic knowledge
72.074.4
GPQA
Graduate-level science
49.165.6
LiveCodeBench
Competitive programming
27.640.2
Aider
Real-world code editing
65.4--
AIME
Competition math
16.0--
MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms in coding benchmarks.

Cost vs Quality

X-axis:
Y-axis:
Loading chart...
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
Other models

Context & Performance

Context Window

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
32,768
tokens
Max output: 16,384 tokens
MiMo-V2-Flash
262,144
tokens
MiMo-V2-Flash has a 88% larger context window.

Speed Performance

MetricQwen2.5 72B InstructMiMo-V2-FlashWinner
Tokens/second45.6 tok/s142.6 tok/s
Time to First Token1.11s1.25s
MiMo-V2-Flash responds 213% faster on average.

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

Related Comparisons

Compare Qwen2.5 72B Instruct with:

Compare MiMo-V2-Flash with:

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.