The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiMo-V2-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched at 30.5 and 35.0 on the LLM Stats Score. MiMo-V2-Flash is 2.7x cheaper per token.

Xiaomi · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 30.5 and 35.0.

In the 6 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, MiMo-V2-Flash is roughly 2.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) also accepts a larger context window (262,144 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose MiMo-V2-Flash

  • cost matters — it's about 2.7x cheaper per token

Choose Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 6 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MiMo-V2-Flash
Xiaomi
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
30.5
#139
35.0
#108
Reasoning
30.6
#135
36.2
#94
Coding
17.4
#138
21.0
#108
Agents
8.0
#156
16.5
#99
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 6
4 of 6
Input price
$0.10 / M
$0.20 / M
Output price
$0.30 / M
$1.00 / M
Context window
256,000
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
MiMo-V2-Flash
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Math
29.2#92
28.1#101
Tool use
6.2#164
11.0#133
Long context
13.8#56
22.9#17
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

15 reported for MiMo-V2-Flash · 19 for Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

6 shared

MiMo-V2-Flash outperforms in 2 benchmarks (SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Verified), while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is better at 4 benchmarks (BrowseComp, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, LiveCodeBench v6).

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Tue Oct 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2-Flash costs less

For input processing, MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) ($0.20/1M tokens).

For output processing, MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.3x cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) ($1.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Oct 20 2026 • llm-stats.com
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerXiaomi
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Input tokens$0.20
Output tokens$1.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

189.0B diff

MiMo-V2-Flash has 189.0B more parameters than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B), making it 157.5% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
309.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
120.0Bparameters
309.0B
MiMo-V2-Flash
120.0B
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to MiMo-V2-Flash's 256,000 tokens. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Tue Oct 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2-Flash does not.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

MiMo-V2-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) uses OpenMDW License v1.1.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

MiMo-V2-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

OpenMDW License v1.1

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) was released on 2026-10-15.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 10 months newer than MiMo-V2-Flash.

MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

10 months ago

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Oct 15, 2026

4 days ago

10mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

MiMo-V2-Flash is available from Xiaomi. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is available from DeepInfra.

MiMo-V2-Flash

xiaomi logo
Xiaomi
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiMo-V2-Flash
✓ Preferred
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B).

Which is better, MiMo-V2-Flash or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 30.5 and 35.0. MiMo-V2-Flash is made by Xiaomi and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is made by NVIDIA. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does MiMo-V2-Flash compare to Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) in benchmarks?

MiMo-V2-Flash scores AIME 2025: 94.1%, Arena-Hard v2: 86.2%, MMLU-Pro: 84.9%, HMMT 2025: 84.4%, GPQA: 83.7%. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) scores GPQA: 89.5%, LiveCodeBench v6: 88.2%, CharXiv-R: 80.8%, MathVision: 78.2%, BrowseComp: 78.0%.

Is MiMo-V2-Flash cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2-Flash is 2.0x cheaper for input tokens. MiMo-V2-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.30/M output via xiaomi. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) costs $0.20/M input and $1.00/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2-Flash supports 256K tokens and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (30.5 vs 35.0), context window (256K vs 262K), input pricing ($0.10 vs $0.20/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons