GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI or MiMo-V2.5 by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GLM-5.3-Flash scores 20.0 points higher (41.8 vs 21.8) but costs 4.9× as much to run the benchmark ($306 vs $61.9; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.3-Flash when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 21.8 | −47.8% MiMo-V2.5 is 47.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $305.52 | $61.93 | −79.7% MiMo-V2.5 is 79.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 39.33s | 41.73s | +6.1% MiMo-V2.5 is 6.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.50 | $0.13 / $0.27 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.5 vs GLM-5.3-Flash: 47.8% less intelligence, 79.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 6.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- 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-5.3-FlashMiMo-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-5-3-flash/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill