Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

Qwen: Qwen3.5-9B vs Xiaomi: MiMo-V2.5

The average score is effectively tied at 5.1 vs 5.1. Qwen3.5-9B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.021 vs $0.025. MiMo-V2.5 is faster at 4.62s vs 19.17s, with pass rates of 19.7% vs 25.8%.

Recommended modelMiMo-V2.5It has the best score here (5.1), while responding about 4.2x faster than Qwen3.5-9B.

Last updated at: 2026-07-22

Metric Qwen3.5-9B Qwen3.5-9B none Release: 2026-03-02 MiMo-V2.5 MiMo-V2.5 none Release: 2026-04-22
Score 5.1 5.1
Rank #177 #176
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 9.7 9.6
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 19.7% 25.8%
Flaky tests 1 1
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.490 0.770
Total Cost $0.021 $0.025
Input Price $0.100 / 1M $0.140 / 1M
Output Price $0.150 / 1M $0.280 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 144,407 141,043
Output Tokens 37,484 16,464
Reasoning Tokens 0 0
Response Time (avg) 19.17s 4.62s
Response Time (max) 382.06s 55.36s
Response Time (total) 421.74s 101.57s

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#177 Qwen3.5-9B

none
Invalid SVG
Cost
$0.000
Time
300.0s
Tokens
0 tok

#176 MiMo-V2.5

none
Cost
$0.007
Time
267.4s
Tokens
25,283 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Qwen3.5-9B 3.9 7.8 11.1% 1 5.60s 7,913 1,042 0
MiMo-V2.5 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 3.24s 7,440 696 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair