Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Xiaomi

Qwen3.5-Flash vs MiMo-V2-Flash

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

115 out of our 496 tracked models have had a price change in March.

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

New

Stop Googling APIs — let your agent choose

Our upcoming API Finder MCP server helps AI agents discover and compare APIs for any task.

Key Takeaways

Qwen3.5-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Supports vision

MiMo-V2-Flash wins:

  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math
Price Advantage
Qwen3.5-Flash
Benchmark Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Context Window
Qwen3.5-Flash
Speed
MiMo-V2-Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

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

License & Release

PropertyQwen3.5-FlashMiMo-V2-Flash
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorQwenXiaomi
ReleasedFeb 2026Dec 2025

Qwen3.5-Flash Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

MiMo-V2-Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Qwen3.5-Flash with:

Compare MiMo-V2-Flash with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.5-Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.07/M tokens. Qwen3.5-Flash has cheaper output pricing at $0.26/M tokens.
MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 25.8, compared to Qwen3.5-Flash's score of N/A.
Qwen3.5-Flash has a 1,000,000 token context window, while MiMo-V2-Flash has a 262,144 token context window.
Qwen3.5-Flash supports vision. MiMo-V2-Flash does not support vision.