Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Qwen3.5 397B A17B vs MiMo-V2.5

Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Qwen) and MiMo-V2.5 (Xiaomi) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 22 September 2026

As of 22 September 2026, Qwen3.5 397B A17B holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#42 vs #43); MiMo-V2.5 is 12.5× cheaper per output token ($0.28/1M vs $3.50/1M); and MiMo-V2.5 offers the longer context window (1M vs 262K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose Qwen3.5 397B A17B if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #42 against #43 (69.7 vs 69.6 points).
  • you want provider choice — 10 listed API providers against 6.
  • Arena coding is your yardstick — 1491 against 1491.

Choose MiMo-V2.5 if…

  • API cost matters — $0.28/1M output tokens against $3.50/1M, about 12.5× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.14/1M against $0.55/1M.
  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 262K.
  • you want the more recently listed model — MiMo-V2.5 was listed 22 April 2026, Qwen3.5 397B A17B 16 February 2026.

Qwen3.5 397B A17B vs MiMo-V2.5: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Qwen3.5 397B A17B and MiMo-V2.5
FieldQwen3.5 397B A17BQwenMiMo-V2.5Xiaomi
ModelCap Index position#42#43
Index score69.769.6
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.55$0.14
Output price / 1M tokens$3.50$0.28
Context window262K tokens1M tokens
Max output tokens236K131K
API providers listed106
Weight accessOpen weightsOpen weights
Input modalitiesText, Image, VideoText, Audio, Image, Video
First listed16 February 202622 April 2026
PublisherQwenXiaomi

Evidence: 3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards · 2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Qwen3.5 397B A17B vs MiMo-V2.5

Public benchmark boards where Qwen3.5 397B A17B or MiMo-V2.5 has a published result
BoardQwen3.5 397B A17BMiMo-V2.5Leads
Arena codingArena (LMArena)14911486–149614911484–1497Qwen3.5 397B A17B
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis18.4intelligence-index:v4.3:reasoning-unspecifiedOnly one result
AA τ²-Bench TelecomArtificial Analysis95.6%tau2:telecom:dual-control:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning)":reasoning=trueOnly one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis29.0%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning)":reasoning=trueOnly one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Qwen3.5 397B A17B vs MiMo-V2.5: common questions

Is Qwen3.5 397B A17B better than MiMo-V2.5?

Qwen3.5 397B A17B ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 22 September 2026: #42 against #43. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is Qwen3.5 397B A17B cheaper than MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper on output tokens: $0.28/1M against $3.50/1M. Input tokens are $0.55/1M for Qwen3.5 397B A17B and $0.14/1M for MiMo-V2.5. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $2.85 for Qwen3.5 397B A17B versus $0.42 for MiMo-V2.5. MiMo-V2.5 costs 85.3% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 has the larger context window: 1M tokens against 262K.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3.5 397B A17B or MiMo-V2.5?

Arena coding: Qwen3.5 397B A17B 1491, MiMo-V2.5 1491 — Qwen3.5 397B A17B leads.

Are Qwen3.5 397B A17B and MiMo-V2.5 open-weight models?

Qwen3.5 397B A17B: Open weights. MiMo-V2.5: Open weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence; API-only models are available solely through hosted endpoints.

Where can I run Qwen3.5 397B A17B and MiMo-V2.5?

ModelCap currently lists 10 API providers for Qwen3.5 397B A17B and 6 for MiMo-V2.5, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Qwen3.5 397B A17B vs MiMo-V2.5 comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 22 September 2026; the page re-renders within a minute of each data refresh, and the ModelCap Index positions are the same ones shown on the live rankings.

Explore further