Model Comparison

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs MiMo-V2-Pro

MiMo-V2-Pro significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 1.1x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

3 benchmarks

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while MiMo-V2-Pro is better at 3 benchmarks (SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0).

MiMo-V2-Pro significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Apr 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B costs less

For input processing, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($0.60/1M tokens) is 1.7x cheaper than MiMo-V2-Pro ($1.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($3.60/1M tokens) is 1.2x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Pro ($3.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, MiMo-V2-Pro is more expensive than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Apr 03 2026 • llm-stats.com
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Input tokens$0.60
Output tokens$3.60
Best providerNovita
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Pro
Input tokens$1.00
Output tokens$3.00
Best providerXiaomi
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

603.0B diff

MiMo-V2-Pro has 603.0B more parameters than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B, making it 151.9% larger.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
397.0Bparameters
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Pro
1000.0Bparameters
397.0B
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
1000.0B
MiMo-V2-Pro

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiMo-V2-Pro accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3.5-397B-A17B's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B can generate longer responses up to 64,000 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Pro is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Input262,144 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Pro
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Fri Apr 03 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2-Pro does not.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2-Pro

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while MiMo-V2-Pro uses a proprietary license.

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

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

MiMo-V2-Pro

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B was released on 2026-02-16, while MiMo-V2-Pro was released on 2026-03-18.

MiMo-V2-Pro is 1 month newer than Qwen3.5-397B-A17B.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

Feb 16, 2026

1 months ago

MiMo-V2-Pro

Mar 18, 2026

2 weeks ago

1mo 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

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is available from Novita. MiMo-V2-Pro is available from Xiaomi.

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.60/1M

MiMo-V2-Pro

xiaomi logo
Xiaomi
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3.5-397B-A17B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Supports multimodal inputs
Less expensive input tokens
Has open weights
Xiaomi
Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Less expensive output tokens
Higher SWE-bench Multilingual score (71.7% vs 69.3%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (78.0% vs 76.4%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (57.1% vs 52.5%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Pro

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs MiMo-V2-Pro

MiMo-V2-Pro significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and MiMo-V2-Pro is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B scores MMLU-Redux: 94.9%, HMMT 2025: 94.8%, C-Eval: 93.0%, HMMT25: 92.7%, IFEval: 92.6%. MiMo-V2-Pro scores Tau2 Telecom: 96.8%, DeepSearchQA: 86.7%, PinchBench: 81.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 78.0%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 71.7%.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 1.7x cheaper for input tokens. Qwen3.5-397B-A17B costs $0.60/M input and $3.60/M output via novita. MiMo-V2-Pro costs $1.00/M input and $3.00/M output via xiaomi.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B supports 262K tokens and MiMo-V2-Pro supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (262K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.60 vs $1.00/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and MiMo-V2-Pro is developed by Xiaomi.