Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen3.5-9B
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro (2026) and Qwen3.5-9B (2026) are agentic coding models from Xiaomi and Alibaba. Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro ships a 1M-token context window, while Qwen3.5-9B ships a 262K-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Qwen3.5-9B leads by 14 pts. On pricing, Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.1/1M input tokens versus $1/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.
Qwen3.5-9B is ~900% cheaper at $0.1/1M; pay for Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | RAG, Agents, and Long context |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Cheapest output | $3/1M tokens | $0.15/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 1 tracked | 3 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 2 rows | MMLU PRO leader |
Decision tradeoffs
- Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Local decision data tags Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Qwen3.5-9B leads the largest shared benchmark signal on MMLU PRO by 14 points.
- Qwen3.5-9B has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $0.15/1M tokens.
- Qwen3.5-9B has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Qwen3.5-9B uniquely exposes Vision and Multimodal in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3.5-9B for RAG, Agents, and Long context.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro
$1,550
Cheapest tracked route: OpenRouter
Qwen3.5-9B
$118
Cheapest tracked route: Together AI
Estimated monthly gap: $1,433. Batch, cache, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Qwen3.5-9B is $2.85/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Qwen3.5-9B adds Vision and Multimodal in local capability data.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro is $2.85/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision and Multimodal before moving production traffic.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2026-03-02 |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Parameters | 1T | 9B |
| Architecture | mixture of experts | decoder only |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $1/1M tokens | $0.1/1M tokens |
| Output price | $3/1M tokens | $0.15/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | Yes |
| Code execution | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU PRO | 68.5 | 82.5 |
| Google-Proof Q&A | 66.7 | 81.7 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro at 68.5 and Qwen3.5-9B at 82.5, with Qwen3.5-9B ahead by 14 points; Google-Proof Q&A has Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro at 66.7 and Qwen3.5-9B at 81.7, with Qwen3.5-9B ahead by 15 points. The largest visible gap is 15 points on Google-Proof Q&A, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Qwen3.5-9B and multimodal input: Qwen3.5-9B. Both models share function calling, tool use, and structured outputs, 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.
For cost, Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists $1/1M input and $3/1M output tokens, while Qwen3.5-9B lists $0.1/1M input and $0.15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Qwen3.5-9B lower by about $1.48 per million blended tokens. Availability is 1 providers versus 3, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro when coding workflow support and larger context windows are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3.5-9B when vision-heavy evaluation, lower input-token cost, 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.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.5-9B?
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro supports 1M tokens, while Qwen3.5-9B supports 262K tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is cheaper, Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.5-9B?
Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs $1/1M input and $3/1M output tokens. Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.1/1M input and $0.15/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.5-9B open source?
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro is listed under Proprietary. Qwen3.5-9B is listed under Apache 2.0. 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, Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.5-9B?
Qwen3.5-9B 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, Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.5-9B?
Qwen3.5-9B 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.
Where can I run Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen3.5-9B?
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro is available on OpenRouter. Qwen3.5-9B is available on Together AI, OpenRouter, and Alibaba Cloud PAI-EAS. 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
Last reviewed: 2026-05-14. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.