Side-by-side comparison
MiMo-V2-Omni vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Omni
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.4000
Output / 1M
$2.0000
Qwen
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.3900
Output / 1M
$2.3400
| MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.5 397B A17B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Qwen |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 262,144 | 262,144 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | vision, tools, json_mode | vision, tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.4000 | 0.3900 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 2.0000 | 2.3400 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper than Qwen3.5 397B A17B on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.165 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
What is the difference between MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
MiMo-V2-Omni comes from Xiaomi; Qwen3.5 397B A17B comes from Qwen. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.