Compare/MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)

MiMo-V2.5-ProvsDeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Xiaomi

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Input
$0.43/M
Output
$0.87/M
Speed
35 tok/s
TTFT
4.07s
DeepSeek

DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)

Input
$0.36/M
Output
$0.89/M
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)
Faster (tok/s)
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Lower Latency
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Benchmarks (2-0)
MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Pricing Comparison

MetricMiMo-V2.5-ProDeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)
Input ($/M tokens)$0.43$0.36
Output ($/M tokens)$0.87$0.89
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
MiMo-V2.5-Pro$0.52
DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)$0.45

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
35 tok/s
DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
4.07s
DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.

Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, MiMo-V2.5-Pro is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). MiMo-V2.5-Pro makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. MiMo-V2.5-Pro is strongest on Coding Index (60.2), Intelligence Index (42.9). DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) leads on Coding Index (23.0), Intelligence Index (14.2).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. Xiaomi and DeepSeek sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Xiaomi tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while DeepSeek often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs $25.95 ($311/year); DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) costs $24.15 ($290/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): MiMo-V2.5-Pro ≈ $3.89/run, DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) ≈ $3.58/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): MiMo-V2.5-Pro ≈ $173/run, DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) ≈ $161/run. DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
42.914.2
Coding Index
60.223.0
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
MiMo-V2.5-Pro2 wins
0 winsDeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)?

DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.49/M tokens vs $0.54/M for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro generates tokens faster at 35 tok/s vs — tok/s. MiMo-V2.5-Pro also has lower time-to-first-token (4.07s vs —s).

When should I use MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)?

Choose based on your priorities: DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) for lower cost, MiMo-V2.5-Pro for stronger benchmark performance, and MiMo-V2.5-Pro for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.