GLM-5.2 (Max) vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.2 (Max) by Z AI 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
GLM-5.2 (Max) scores 11.9 points higher (33.7 vs 21.8) but costs 34× as much to run the benchmark ($2097 vs $61.9; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.2 (Max) when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.2 (Max) | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 33.7 | 21.8 | −35.3% MiMo-V2.5 is 35.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,097.29 | $61.93 | −97.0% MiMo-V2.5 is 97.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 29.25s | 45.39s | +55.2% MiMo-V2.5 is 55.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.40 / $4.40 | $0.13 / $0.27 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.5 vs GLM-5.2 (Max): 35.3% less intelligence, 97.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 55.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.2 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- MiMo-V2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
GLM-5.2 (Max)MiMo-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/glm-5-2/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-2/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill