Model Comparison

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs MiMo-V2.5-ProWhich is better in 2026?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Verdict: Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro — which is better?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) and MiMo-V2.5-Pro (by Xiaomi) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B outperforms in 4 benchmarks (GPQA, LiveCodeBench v6, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-Redux), while MiMo-V2.5-Pro is better at 8 benchmarks (C-Eval, Claw-Eval, GDPval-AA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-Bench Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, TAU3-Bench, Terminal-Bench 2.0). MiMo-V2.5-Pro shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Choose Qwen3.6-35B-A3B if…

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

Choose MiMo-V2.5-Pro if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 8 of 12 shared benchmarks
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Apr 2026

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

12 benchmarks

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B outperforms in 4 benchmarks (GPQA, LiveCodeBench v6, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-Redux), while MiMo-V2.5-Pro is better at 8 benchmarks (C-Eval, Claw-Eval, GDPval-AA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-Bench Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, TAU3-Bench, Terminal-Bench 2.0).

MiMo-V2.5-Pro shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Fri Jul 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

988.2B diff

MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 988.2B more parameters than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B, making it 2823.6% larger.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
35.0Bparameters
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
1.0Tparameters
35.0B
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
1023.2B
MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Fri Jul 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2.5-Pro does not.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while MiMo-V2.5-Pro uses MIT.

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

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B was released on 2026-04-16, while MiMo-V2.5-Pro was released on 2026-04-27.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is 0 month newer than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Apr 16, 2026

3 months ago

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Apr 27, 2026

2 months ago

1w 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Supports multimodal inputs
Higher GPQA score (86.0% vs 66.7%)
Higher LiveCodeBench v6 score (80.4% vs 39.6%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (85.2% vs 68.5%)
Higher MMLU-Redux score (93.3% vs 92.8%)
Xiaomi
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Higher C-Eval score (91.5% vs 90.0%)
Higher Claw-Eval score (64.0% vs 50.0%)
Higher GDPval-AA score (42.9% vs 35.2%)
Higher Humanity's Last Exam score (34.0% vs 21.4%)
Higher SWE-Bench Pro score (57.2% vs 49.5%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (78.9% vs 73.4%)
Higher TAU3-Bench score (72.9% vs 67.2%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (68.4% vs 51.5%)

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5-Pro

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro.

Which is better, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and MiMo-V2.5-Pro is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Qwen3.6-35B-A3B compare to MiMo-V2.5-Pro in benchmarks?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scores MMLU-Redux: 93.3%, MMBench-V1.1: 92.8%, AI2D: 92.7%, AIME 2026: 92.7%, RefCOCO-avg: 92.0%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores FrontierSWE (Impl.): 100.0%, GSM8k: 99.6%, ARC-C: 97.2%, MMLU-Redux: 92.8%, C-Eval: 91.5%.

What are the context window sizes for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B supports an unknown number of tokens and MiMo-V2.5-Pro supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

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

Who makes Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and MiMo-V2.5-Pro is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons