Model comparison
Grok 4.3 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 19 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Grok 4.3 #31 (Supported); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Grok 4.3 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 19 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to Grok 4.3; 12 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 19
- Grok 4.3 only
- 6
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 12
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 19 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 70.19 to 65.1. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 57.2 against 47.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 35% to 48%.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Grok 4.3 | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Grok 4.347.3 | Margin→ 9.9 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
| Knowledge | Grok 4.342.4 | Margin→ 5.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
| Agentic | Grok 4.3Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Multimodal | Grok 4.378.1 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Grok 4.381.3 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 35%B 48%Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 13HLE: Grok 4.3 scored 35%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 48%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Grok 4.3 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Grok 4.3$1.25 input / $2.5 output | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Grok 4.3209 tok/s | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Grok 4.312.36 s | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Grok 4.31M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 97.7% | 94.2% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 29.2% | 38.3% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 24.1% | 29.1% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 17.0% | 2.4% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1085 | 1265 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 43.86% | 62.70% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 12.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 68.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 873 | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 38.2% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 43.2% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 73.3% | Not comparable |
CodingMiMo-V2.5-Pro wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2.5-Pro wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 37.6% | 42.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| GPQASource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 35% | 48% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 34.6% | 22.6% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 25.0% | 24.5% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 90.1% | 86.6% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 35.0% | 33.8% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 18.3% | 3.6% | Grok 4.3 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 34% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Grok 4.3 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 70.19 to 65.1. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 35% and 48%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Grok 4.3 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 48 versus 42.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Grok 4.3 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 57.2 versus 47.3. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.