MiMo-V2.5 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: MiMo-V2.5 by Xiaomi or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-09.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick MiMo-V2.5
Qwen3 Coder Next vs MiMo-V2.5: 54.7% less intelligence, 1017.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 87.5% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 22.3 | 10.1 | −54.7% Qwen3 Coder Next is 54.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $42.61 | $476.03 | +1017.2% Qwen3 Coder Next is 11× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 44.31s | 5.52s | −87.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 87.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.14 / $0.28 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- MiMo-V2.5 is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
MiMo-V2.5Qwen3 Coder NextToday'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/mimo-v2-5-0424/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mimo-v2-5-0424/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill