Updated March 26, 2026· Based on independent benchmark data
MiMo-V2-Pro and GPT-5.1 (high) are virtually tied on intelligence (49.2 vs 47.7).
| Metric | MiMo-V2-Pro | GPT-5.1 (high) |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence Score | 49.2 | 47.7 |
| Coding Score | 41.4 | 44.7 |
| Math Score | N/A | 94.0 |
| Speed (tok/s) | 91 tok/s | 92 tok/s |
| Latency (TTFT) | 1.55s | 39.04s |
| Input Price / 1M tokens | $1.00 | $1.25 |
| Output Price / 1M tokens | $3.00 | $10 |
| Context Window | N/A | N/A |
| Max Output Tokens | N/A | N/A |
| Input Modalities | Text | Text |
MiMo-V2-Pro and GPT-5.1 (high) perform similarly on overall intelligence, scoring 49.2 and 47.7 respectively. For coding tasks, GPT-5.1 (high) has the edge with a coding score of 44.7 vs 41.4.
Both models deliver similar output speeds: MiMo-V2-Pro at 91 tok/s and GPT-5.1 (high) at 92 tok/s. Time to first token is 1.55s for MiMo-V2-Pro vs 39.04s for GPT-5.1 (high), which affects perceived responsiveness in interactive applications.
MiMo-V2-Pro is more affordable at $1.00/1M input tokens ($3.00/1M output), while GPT-5.1 (high) costs $1.25/1M input ($10/1M output). For a typical workload of 100 requests per day at 2,000 tokens each, MiMo-V2-Pro would cost approximately $6.00/month vs $7.50/month for GPT-5.1 (high) in input costs alone.
Choose GPT-5.1 (high) when you need stronger coding performance (44.7).
GPT-5.1 (high) scores higher on coding benchmarks (44.7 vs 41.4), making it the better choice for programming tasks.
MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $1.00/1M input tokens vs $1.25/1M for GPT-5.1 (high).
GPT-5.1 (high) is faster, producing output at 92 tok/s compared to MiMo-V2-Pro's 91 tok/s.
No, MiMo-V2-Pro does not support image input. Neither model supports image input.
Data last synced: March 26, 2026
| Output Modalities |
| Text |
| Text |
| Free Tier | No | No |
Both models perform similarly on intelligence benchmarks. Choose based on specific needs: pricing, speed, context window, or provider ecosystem.