Aquila 2 7B vs MiMo-V2.5
Aquila 2 7B (2023) and MiMo-V2.5 (2026) are frontier reasoning models from Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence (BAAI) and Xiaomi. Aquila 2 7B ships a 2K-token context window, while MiMo-V2.5 ships a 1M-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
MiMo-V2.5 fits 524x more tokens; pick it for long-context work and Aquila 2 7B for tighter calls.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Aquila 2 7B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | general production evaluation | reasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agents |
| Decision fit | General | RAG, Agents, and Long context |
| Context window | 2K | 1M |
| Cheapest output | - | $0.28/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 0 tracked | 2 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 shared | 0 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- Use Aquila 2 7B when your own prompt tests beat the comparison signals; the local data does not show a decisive standalone advantage yet.
- MiMo-V2.5 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- MiMo-V2.5 has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and route flexibility.
- MiMo-V2.5 uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Reasoning in local model data.
- Local decision data tags MiMo-V2.5 for RAG, Agents, and Long context.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Aquila 2 7B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
MiMo-V2.5
$182
Cheapest tracked route/tier: OpenRouter
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Aquila 2 7B and MiMo-V2.5; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- MiMo-V2.5 adds Vision, Multimodal, and Reasoning in local capability data.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for MiMo-V2.5 and Aquila 2 7B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Reasoning before moving production traffic.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2026-04-22 |
| Context window | 2K | 1M |
| Parameters | 7B | — |
| Architecture | Decoder Only | - |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Openness | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Weights | Not released | Not released |
| Code | Unknown | Unknown |
| Commercial use | Restricted | Restricted |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Aquila 2 7B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | $0.14/1M tokens |
| Output price | - | $0.28/1M tokens |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Capability | Aquila 2 7B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| JSON / Tool use | No | Yes |
| Structured outputs | No | Yes |
| Code execution | No | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark scores are currently available for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on vision: MiMo-V2.5, multimodal input: MiMo-V2.5, reasoning mode: MiMo-V2.5, JSON / Tool use: MiMo-V2.5, JSON / Tool use: MiMo-V2.5, and structured outputs: MiMo-V2.5. Both models share the core language-model surface, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
Pricing coverage is uneven: Aquila 2 7B has no token price listed and MiMo-V2.5 has $0.14/1M input tokens. Provider availability is 0 listed routes versus 2. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Aquila 2 7B when provider fit are central to the workload. Choose MiMo-V2.5 when reasoning depth, larger context windows, and broader provider choice are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Aquila 2 7B or MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 supports 1M tokens, while Aquila 2 7B supports 2K tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Is Aquila 2 7B or MiMo-V2.5 open source?
Aquila 2 7B is listed under Proprietary. MiMo-V2.5 is listed under Proprietary. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Aquila 2 7B or MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for multimodal input, Aquila 2 7B or MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for reasoning mode, Aquila 2 7B or MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 has the clearer documented reasoning mode signal in this comparison. If reasoning mode is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Aquila 2 7B and MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 is available on OpenRouter and Xiaomi. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Continue comparing
Popular comparisons for Aquila 2 7B
Popular comparisons for MiMo-V2.5
Last reviewed: 2026-10-29. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.