Llama 4 Scout vs MiMo-V2.5

Meta · US  |  Xiaomi · China · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Llama 4 Scout for largest advertised context (10m) or open weights, single-gpu friendly. Pick MiMo-V2.5 for native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding or very low cost (~half the inference of the pro tier). On a tight budget at scale, Llama 4 Scout is the value pick.

Llama 4 Scout (Meta, US) and MiMo-V2.5 (Xiaomi, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Llama 4 Scout is the 10M-token open-weight giant — enormous on paper, but usable recall is far smaller. MiMo-V2.5 is xiaomi's cheap omnimodal model — Pro-level agentic perception across image and video at a fraction of the cost. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecLlama 4 ScoutMiMo-V2.5
ProviderMeta (US) Xiaomi (China)
ReleasedApril 2025 April 22, 2026
Context window10M (~15,000 pages) 1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)Open weight (self-host / free) $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens
Open weight?Yes — self-hostable Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, image, code text, image, audio, video, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M15% Not published

Who wins what

Largest advertised context (10M)

Llama 4 Scout

A core design strength of Llama 4 Scout.

Open weights, single-GPU friendly

Llama 4 Scout

A core design strength of Llama 4 Scout.

Self-hosted, data-private deployment

Llama 4 Scout

A core design strength of Llama 4 Scout.

Native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding

MiMo-V2.5

A core design strength of MiMo-V2.5.

Very low cost (~half the inference of the Pro tier)

MiMo-V2.5

A core design strength of MiMo-V2.5.

Agent-framework integration

MiMo-V2.5

A core design strength of MiMo-V2.5.

Lowest cost at scale

Llama 4 Scout

At Open weight (self-host / free), it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Largest single-prompt input

Llama 4 Scout

Its 10M window is about 10× larger, fitting roughly 15,000 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Llama 4 Scout

At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts MiMo-V2.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Llama 4 Scout

Larger 10M window fits more in one prompt.

Anyone whose priority is largest advertised context (10m)

Llama 4 Scout

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding

MiMo-V2.5

That is its strongest area.

An enterprise with regional data-residency rules

Llama 4 Scout or MiMo-V2.5

Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.

Llama 4 Scout: where it fits

The 10M-token open-weight giant — enormous on paper, but usable recall is far smaller. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for largest advertised context (10M), open weights, single-GPU friendly, self-hosted, data-private deployment, and retrieval over very long inputs.

Its trade-offs are real: effective recall degrades far below 10M, and ~15% on long-context multi-needle reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

MiMo-V2.5: where it fits

Xiaomi's cheap omnimodal model — Pro-level agentic perception across image and video at a fraction of the cost. Released April 22, 2026 by Xiaomi, it is built for native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding, very low cost (~half the inference of the Pro tier), agent-framework integration, and 1M context for full documents in one pass.

Its trade-offs: not the deepest reasoning tier (see V2.5-Pro), and limited Western tooling and support. At $0.14 in / $0.28 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Llama 4 Scout (US) and MiMo-V2.5 (China) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Llama 4 Scout is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.

Want both Llama 4 Scout and MiMo-V2.5 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 4 Scout or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Llama 4 Scout leans toward largest advertised context (10m) while MiMo-V2.5 leans toward native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout or MiMo-V2.5?

Llama 4 Scout is cheaper — Open weight (self-host / free) vs $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens.

Which has the bigger context window?

Llama 4 Scout — 10M vs 1M, about 10× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both Llama 4 Scout and MiMo-V2.5 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Llama 4 Scout, MiMo-V2.5 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, Llama 4 Scout or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 — released April 22, 2026, about 13 months after Llama 4 Scout.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.