← Back to context

Comment by joelwallis

13 hours ago

I been using MiMo-V2.5 to do most of my work as software engineer, on a variety of projects I'm working on, and I been VERY happy with ROI. The model is very powerful! Not perfect – I've run in hallucination loops once or twice, but nothing a stop-then-continue wouldn't solve.

The cost is unbelievably low, and the quality of intelligence I get is equivalent to when I was working mostly with Anthropic models (late last year/early this year). I'm fully invested in MiMo and I'm very happy with it.

-- PS: I also check almost daily to see if other models are capable of doing such great work. And they do – DS4F is powerful and DS41 is impressive, GLM 5.3 Flash gets a job done well, etc. – but when I add cost of M-token in the ROI math, Jeez! MiMo is an order of magnitude better.

> late last year/early this year

That's an eternity when it comes to coding models.

In my personal experience, we've had almost a step change every ~3 months this year, at least for bigger one-shot tasks. For example looking at Gemini Flash 3.0 vs 3.5 vs 3.8, it went 5% -> 30% -> 75% on DeepSWE, all since the start of the year.

Same here. It’s the first AI provider I actually gave money to, since they offered the model for free with a Mimo code for the first month or so, and it was great.

These days, there are more intelligent models like DS4.1, but Mimo is very obedient, so I plan things with another model and give the implementation to Mimo.

I’ve been very pleased with DS 4.1 flash. Not so much the 4.0 models, but for coding (Rust) it’s been great so far (3 solid days of work).

I’ll give Mimo a try.

  • MiMo is my backup whenever DeepSeek is down, had the price bump, is slow, etc.

    UltraSpeed was absolutely awesome. I miss it.

    DS 4.1 Flash is amazing. Well worth the extra cost.

Could you elaborate on how you check daily? Do you swap models for certain tasks?

I've found that mimo v2.5 works for very basic things like a python script to do one thing, but it also is very 'dumb' compared to qwen 3.8-flash-next (I think the benchmark scores for terminal and coding specific benches back this up). And definitely not in the same class as like a GLM5.2 or 5.3. It's fast but makes basic mistakes that only get caught later.

  • The fact I can run Qwen 3.8 Flash Next locally, forever (on my DGX Spark-alike) is genuinely shocking to me. It’s crazy good for how small it is. Fast, too.

    • Yeah, I'm guessing you have a variant that fits in <128GB with 262k context? I have the unsloth Q8 GGUF of it here in a setup that with full context and ton of extra llama-server "--cache-ram" sits around 200GB RAM usage on a 256GB system, it's probably the best thing I've found for a 256GB class machine. Enough headroom for a rope/yarn extension to 524288 context if I need it.

      1 reply →

2.5 Pro or the regular 2.5?

I always found that those Mimo models to be really good at tool calling and following instructions

> GLM 5.3 Flash gets a job done well, etc. – but when I add cost of M-token in the ROI math, Jeez! MiMo is an order of magnitude better.

API may be expensive, but I do 900m tokens (95% cached, ~0.4% output) on Z.ai's $18/mo coding plan with GLM 5.3 Flash.

  • I wouldn't call that inexpensive.

    For comparison, I am currently at 6.6B tokens, 95% of monthly quota on a 10$ command code plan, mostly using DeepSeek flash 4.1, or some of the free models for easier tasks.

How fast is it compared with the other Chinese models?

  • They both are in the 50-100 tok/s range. The Mimo v2.5 Pro Ultraspeed beta could reach 1000 tok/s, hoping they can do something similar for the new model, it was amazing.