GLM-5.2 (max) vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.2 (max) by Z AI or MiMo-V2.5-Pro by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-07.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GLM-5.2 (max) scores 9.7 points higher (52.6 vs 42.9) but costs 9.1× as much to run the benchmark ($904 vs $98.9; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.2 (max) when you need intelligence above 42.9, and MiMo-V2.5-Pro when 42.9 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.2 (max) | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 52.6 | 42.9 | −18.4% MiMo-V2.5-Pro is 18.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $904.12 | $98.86 | −89.1% MiMo-V2.5-Pro is 89.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 21.65s | 38.52s | +77.9% MiMo-V2.5-Pro is 77.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.30 / $4.18 | $0.43 / $0.87 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs GLM-5.2 (max): 18.4% less intelligence, 89.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 77.9% 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, Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) scores 56.80 for $639.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) scores 51.80 for $72.0.
GLM-5.2 (max)MiMo-V2.5-ProToday's Pareto 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-pro · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-2/mimo-v2-5-pro?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill