Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite by Google or MiMo-V2.5 by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scores 0.4 points higher (22.2 vs 21.8) but costs 5.9× as much to run the benchmark ($366 vs $61.9; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 22.2 | 21.8 | −1.8% MiMo-V2.5 is 1.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $365.63 | $61.93 | −83.1% MiMo-V2.5 is 83.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 9.51s | 53.92s | +467.0% MiMo-V2.5 is 467.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $2.50 | $0.13 / $0.27 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: 1.8% less intelligence, 83.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 467.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- MiMo-V2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiMo-V2.5Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash-lite/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash-lite/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill