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.

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

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.