MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Medium)
Which is better for the money: MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) by Xiaomi or Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) by Alibaba? 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
Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) scores 1.6 points higher (27.6 vs 26.0) but costs 5.0× as much to run the benchmark ($1165 vs $231; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) when you need intelligence above 26.0, and MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) when 26.0 is enough.
| Metric | MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) | Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.0 | 27.6 | +6.2% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 6.2% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $231.08 | $1,165.00 | +404.2% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 5.0× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 49.53s | 56.04s | +13.1% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 13.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.41 / $1.02 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning): 6.2% more intelligence, 404.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 13.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning)Qwen3.8 27B (Medium)Today'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-pro/qwen3-8-27b-medium · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mimo-v2-5-pro/qwen3-8-27b-medium?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill