Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Stepfun-ai
vs
Xiaomi

Step 3.5 Flash vs MiMo-V2-Flash

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

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

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

Step 3.5 Flash wins:

  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding

MiMo-V2-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
Price Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Benchmark Advantage
Step 3.5 Flash
Context Window
MiMo-V2-Flash
Speed
MiMo-V2-Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureStep 3.5 FlashMiMo-V2-Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyStep 3.5 FlashMiMo-V2-Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorStepfun-aiXiaomi
ReleasedJan 2026Dec 2025

Step 3.5 Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

MiMo-V2-Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Step 3.5 Flash 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.
Step 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 31.6, compared to MiMo-V2-Flash's score of 25.8.
Step 3.5 Flash has a 256,000 token context window, while MiMo-V2-Flash has a 262,144 token context window.
Step 3.5 Flash does not support vision. MiMo-V2-Flash does not support vision.