Model Comparison

MiMo-V2-Flash vs QwQ-32B-Preview

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. MiMo-V2-Flash is 1.1x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

MiMo-V2-Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while QwQ-32B-Preview is better at 0 benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2-Flash costs less

For input processing, MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens) is 1.5x cheaper than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.30/1M tokens) is 1.5x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, QwQ-32B-Preview is more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerXiaomi
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.20
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

276.5B diff

MiMo-V2-Flash has 276.5B more parameters than QwQ-32B-Preview, making it 850.8% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
309.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
32.5Bparameters
309.0B
MiMo-V2-Flash
32.5B
QwQ-32B-Preview

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiMo-V2-Flash accepts 256,000 input tokens compared to QwQ-32B-Preview's 32,768 tokens. QwQ-32B-Preview can generate longer responses up to 32,768 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview
Input32,768 tokens
Output32,768 tokens
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2-Flash is licensed under MIT, while QwQ-32B-Preview 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

QwQ-32B-Preview

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16, while QwQ-32B-Preview was released on 2024-11-28.

MiMo-V2-Flash is 13 months newer than QwQ-32B-Preview.

MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

4 months ago

1.0yr newer
QwQ-32B-Preview

Nov 28, 2024

1.4 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

QwQ-32B-Preview has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-28, while MiMo-V2-Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm QwQ-32B-Preview's training data extends to 2024-11-28, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiMo-V2-Flash's cutoff date.

MiMo-V2-Flash

—

QwQ-32B-Preview

Nov 2024

Provider Availability

MiMo-V2-Flash is available from Xiaomi. QwQ-32B-Preview is available from DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks, Together.

MiMo-V2-Flash

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

QwQ-32B-Preview

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $1.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Xiaomi
Larger context window (256,000 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Higher GPQA score (83.7% vs 65.2%)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

QwQ-32B-Preview

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B-Preview

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2-Flash vs QwQ-32B-Preview

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. MiMo-V2-Flash is made by Xiaomi and QwQ-32B-Preview is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
MiMo-V2-Flash scores AIME 2025: 94.1%, Arena-Hard v2: 86.2%, MMLU-Pro: 84.9%, HMMT 2025: 84.4%, GPQA: 83.7%. QwQ-32B-Preview scores MATH-500: 90.6%, GPQA: 65.2%, AIME 2024: 50.0%, LiveCodeBench: 50.0%.
MiMo-V2-Flash is 1.5x cheaper for input tokens. MiMo-V2-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.30/M output via xiaomi. QwQ-32B-Preview costs $0.15/M input and $0.20/M output via deepinfra.
MiMo-V2-Flash supports 256K tokens and QwQ-32B-Preview supports 33K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (256K vs 33K), input pricing ($0.10 vs $0.15/M), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi and QwQ-32B-Preview is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.