Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI 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
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) scores 24.6 points higher (46.4 vs 21.8) but costs 80× as much to run the benchmark ($4967 vs $61.9; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.4 | 21.8 | −53.0% MiMo-V2.5 is 53.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,967.35 | $61.93 | −98.8% MiMo-V2.5 is 98.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 40.31s | 41.73s | +3.5% MiMo-V2.5 is 3.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.13 / $0.27 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.5 vs Grok 4.7 (Xhigh): 53.0% less intelligence, 98.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 3.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.7 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- MiMo-V2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
Grok 4.7 (Xhigh)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/grok-4-7/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill