← Back to Model Hub/SIDE-BY-SIDE REVIEW
SHARE THIS:

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Detailed technical comparison between Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (Meta) and MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Xiaomi). Review live API token pricing, context window capabilities, time-to-first-token latency, and verified benchmark scores side-by-side.

⚑ Executive Summary & Verdict

Comparison Snapshot

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct: 4 WinsvsMiMo-V2.5-Pro: 2 Wins
Context Leader

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

1,050,000 tokens
Agentic Tool-Calling

Tie

Equal Capability
Lowest Latency (TTFT)

Tie

Equal Speed
Input Price Leader

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

$0.13 / MTok
Metaactive

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Meta's state-of-the-art open weights model, providing enterprise-grade reasoning and logic. Exceptionally powerful for self-hosted customer support, text generation, and tooling workflows.

View Llama 3.3 70B Instruct Full Specs β†’
Xiaomiactive

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is Xiaomi’s flagship model, delivering strong performance in general agentic capabilities, complex software engineering, and long-horizon tasks, with top rankings on benchmarks such as ClawEval, GDPVal, and SWE-bench Pro....

View MiMo-V2.5-Pro Full Specs β†’

Technical Specifications

πŸ† = Superior Spec
SpecificationLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiMo-V2.5-Pro
ProviderMetaXiaomi
Context Window131,072 tokens1,050,000 tokensπŸ†
Agent Suitability83/100 (est.)Not yet benchmarked
Time to First Token (TTFT)280 ms (est.)No public TTFT data
Deployment Modelself hostablemanaged api
Production StabilityStable GA (est.)Beta Access (est.)
API AvailableYesYes
Released Date2024-12-062026-04-22

API Pricing Comparison

Input Price per Million Tokens

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

$0.13

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

$0.43

Output Price per Million Tokens

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

$0.40

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

$0.87

πŸ’‘ Cost Ratio: Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is 3.3x cheaper per input token than MiMo-V2.5-Pro.

Want to test both models live?

Run side-by-side prompt benchmarks in our dynamic multi-model Sandbox. Compare execution speeds, latency metrics, and compute actual costs in real-time.

Benchmark Performance Metrics

Standardized Scores (0–100%)

Scores show verified raw accuracy percentages across standardized AI evaluation suites. Higher bars indicate superior performance in that domain.

MMLUGeneral knowledge & multi-task understanding
86.2%vs86.6%+0.4% MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
MiMo-V2.5-Pro πŸ†
HumanEvalPython coding & logic synthesis
88.0%vs85.8%+2.2% Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct πŸ†
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MATHComplex mathematical problem solving
75.0%vs67.0%+8.0% Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct πŸ†
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
GPQAGraduate-level expert reasoning
52.0%vs48.4%+3.6% Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct πŸ†
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
HellaSwagCommonsense reasoning and inference
88.5%vs87.6%+0.9% Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct πŸ†
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MT-BenchMulti-turn conversation flow quality
8.8%vs9.0%+0.2% MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
MiMo-V2.5-Pro πŸ†

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct Quirks & Gotchas

  • β–ΈStable, well-documented self-hosted option with strong community support
  • β–ΈOutperformed by Llama 4 Maverick for agentic tool-calling workflows

MiMo-V2.5-Pro Quirks & Gotchas

No developer gotchas reported.

Explore Other Popular Comparisons