The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Xiaomi · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2-Flash outperforms in 5 benchmarks (AIME 2025, Arena-Hard v2, GPQA, LiveCodeBench v6, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks. MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Based on current benchmark, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose MiMo-V2-Flash

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 5 of 5 shared benchmarks
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Dec 2025

Choose Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct

  • you are already invested in the Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Benchmark wins
5 of 5
0 of 5
Input price
$0.10 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.30 / M
— / M
Context window
256,000
Released
Dec 2025
Sep 2025
License
MIT
Apache 2.0

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

5 benchmarks

MiMo-V2-Flash outperforms in 5 benchmarks (AIME 2025, Arena-Hard v2, GPQA, LiveCodeBench v6, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Aug 25 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

276.0B diff

MiMo-V2-Flash has 276.0B more parameters than Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct, making it 836.4% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
309.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct
33.0Bparameters
309.0B
MiMo-V2-Flash
33.0B
Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only MiMo-V2-Flash specifies input context (256,000 tokens). Only MiMo-V2-Flash specifies output context (16,384 tokens).

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Aug 25 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2-Flash does not.

Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

MiMo-V2-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

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

MiMo-V2-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16, while Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct was released on 2025-09-22.

MiMo-V2-Flash is 3 months newer than Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct.

MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

8 months ago

2mo newer
Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct

Sep 22, 2025

11 months ago

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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiMo-V2-Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct.

Which is better, MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct?

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. MiMo-V2-Flash is made by Xiaomi and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does MiMo-V2-Flash compare to Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct 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%. Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct scores DocVQAtest: 96.9%, ScreenSpot: 95.8%, CharXiv-D: 90.5%, MMLU-Redux: 89.8%, AI2D: 89.5%.

What are the context window sizes for MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct?

MiMo-V2-Flash supports 256K tokens and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct supports an unknown number of 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 Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct?

Key differences include multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct?

MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi and Qwen3 VL 32B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.