Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Xiaomi

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B wins:

  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports vision

MiMo-V2-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Better at math
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Context Window
MiMo-V2-Flash
Speed
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen3.5-122B-A10BMiMo-V2-Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen3.5-122B-A10BMiMo-V2-Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenXiaomi
ReleasedFeb 2026Dec 2025

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
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.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 31.6, compared to MiMo-V2-Flash's score of 25.8.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has a 262,144 token context window, while MiMo-V2-Flash has a 262,144 token context window.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B supports vision. MiMo-V2-Flash does not support vision.