The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiMo-V2.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

MiMo-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched at 35.9 and 35.0 on the LLM Stats Score. MiMo-V2.5 is 1.9x cheaper per token.

Xiaomi · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 35.9 and 35.0.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, MiMo-V2.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, MiMo-V2.5 is roughly 1.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

MiMo-V2.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 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-V2.5

  • your work emphasizes coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 1.9x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

Choose Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MiMo-V2.5
Xiaomi
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
35.9
#100
35.0
#108
Reasoning
35.5
#97
36.2
#94
Coding
28.8
#68
21.0
#108
Agents
21.1
#79
16.5
#99
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$0.17 / M
$0.20 / M
Output price
$0.34 / M
$1.00 / M
Context window
1,048,576
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
MiMo-V2.5
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Vision
23.7#70
20.3#86
Multimodal
25.7#56
22.0#76
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

14 reported for MiMo-V2.5 · 19 for Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

2 shared

MiMo-V2.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, SWE-Bench Pro), while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is better at 0 benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.5 significantly outperforms across most 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-V2.5 costs less

For input processing, MiMo-V2.5 ($0.17/1M tokens) is 1.2x cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) ($0.20/1M tokens).

For output processing, MiMo-V2.5 ($0.34/1M tokens) is 3.0x 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-V2.5.*

* 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-V2.5
Input tokens$0.17
Output tokens$0.34
Best providerNovita
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

190.8B diff

MiMo-V2.5 has 190.8B more parameters than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B), making it 159.0% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5
310.8Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
120.0Bparameters
310.8B
MiMo-V2.5
120.0B
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiMo-V2.5 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)'s 262,144 tokens. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while MiMo-V2.5 is limited to 131,072 tokens.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 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

Both MiMo-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

MiMo-V2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2.5 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-V2.5

MIT

Open weights

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

OpenMDW License v1.1

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2.5 was released on 2026-04-22, while Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) was released on 2026-10-15.

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is 6 months newer than MiMo-V2.5.

MiMo-V2.5

Apr 22, 2026

6 months ago

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)

Oct 15, 2026

5 days ago

5mo 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-V2.5 is available from Novita, DeepInfra. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is available from DeepInfra.

MiMo-V2.5

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.17/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.34/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M

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-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiMo-V2.5
✓ Preferred
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B).

Which is better, MiMo-V2.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 35.9 and 35.0. MiMo-V2.5 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-V2.5 compare to Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) in benchmarks?

MiMo-V2.5 scores HR-Bench (4k): 88.5%, Video-MME: 87.7%, OmniDocBench: 87.2%, GraphWalks: 87.0%, DailyOmni: 83.5%. 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-V2.5 cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2.5 is 1.2x cheaper for input tokens. MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.17/M input and $0.34/M output via novita. 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-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2.5 supports 1.0M 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-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (35.9 vs 35.0), context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($0.17 vs $0.20/M), licensing (MIT vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiMo-V2.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)?

MiMo-V2.5 is developed by Xiaomi and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons