| Signal | o3 | Delta | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | +17 | |
Benchmarks | 88 | +88 | |
Pricing | 8 | +6 | |
Context window size | 84 | -2 | |
Recency | 70 | -30 | |
Output Capacity | 83 | +3 | |
| Overall Result | 4 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
12
days higher
3
days
15
days higher
OpenAI
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Omni saves you $460.00/month
That's $5520.00/year compared to o3 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | o3 | MiMo-V2-Omni | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 85 | 85 | o3 |
| Rank | #20 | #22 | o3 |
| Quality Rank | #20 | #22 | o3 |
| Adoption Rank | #20 | #22 | o3 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 200K | 262K | MiMo-V2-Omni |
| Pricing | $2.00/$8.00/M | $0.40/$2.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 83 | o3 |
| Benchmarks | 88 | -- | o3 |
| Pricing | 8 | 2 | o3 |
| Context window size | 84 | 86 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
| Recency | 70 | 100 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
| Output Capacity | 83 | 80 | o3 |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 85/100 (rank #20), placing it in the top 93% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 85/100 (rank #22), placing it in the top 93% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
MiMo-V2-Omni offers 76% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $36.00/month with MiMo-V2-Omni vs $150.00/month with o3 - a $114.00 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. MiMo-V2-Omni also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (262K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($2.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (85/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
o3 and MiMo-V2-Omni are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.4000000000000057 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
o3
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
MiMo-V2-Omni
76% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
o3
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
o3
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
o3
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
| Capability | o3 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Searchdiffers | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Omni saves you $10.08/month
That's 76% cheaper than o3 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | o3 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 200K | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | 100,000 | 65,536 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Apr 16, 2025 | Mar 18, 2026 |
o3 scores 85/100 (rank #20) compared to MiMo-V2-Omni's 85/100 (rank #22), giving it a 0-point advantage. o3 is the stronger overall choice, though MiMo-V2-Omni may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
o3 is ranked #20 and MiMo-V2-Omni is ranked #22 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper at $2.00/M output tokens vs o3's $8.00/M output tokens - 4.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: o3 at $2.00/M vs MiMo-V2-Omni at $0.40/M.
MiMo-V2-Omni has a larger context window of 262,144 tokens compared to o3's 200,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.