Apertus 70B vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs MiMo-V2-Pro
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) comes out ahead, 52 to 42 and 32 on our weighted score, though Apertus 70B is 22% cheaper per token.
Swiss AI
Apertus 70B
32/100- ECI—
- Price$0.82 / $2.42
- Context66K
- Our pick
xAIGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
52/100- ECI—
- Price$1.25 / $2.50
- Context1M
XiaomiMiMo-V2-Pro
42/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $3.00
- Context1.05M
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is our pick
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 52/100 against MiMo-V2-Pro (42) and Apertus 70B (32). It leads on inputs & features. Apertus 70B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceApertus 70BApertus 70B $1.22 · MiMo-V2-Pro $1.50 · Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) $1.56 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2-ProMiMo-V2-Pro 1,048,576 · Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) 1,000,000 · Apertus 70B 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)Apertus 70B: Text · Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): Text, Images, PDFs · MiMo-V2-Pro: Text
- Self-hostingApertus 70BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 70B | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 44 | 39 | 40 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 70 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 60 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 32/100 | 52/100 | 42/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Apertus 70BSwiss AI | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)xAI | MiMo-V2-ProXiaomi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.82 (best) | $1.25 | $1.00 |
| Output | $2.42 (best) | $2.50 | $3.00 |
| Cached input | — | $0.20 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.22 (best) | $1.56 | $1.50 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 200K: $2.50 / $5.00 | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Official xAI API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 30,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | grok-4.20-0309-non-reasoning | — |
| API providers | 3 | 13 (best) | 2 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Mar 9, 2026 | Mar 18, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | — | Dec 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Apertus 70B$13.04
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)$17.50
- MiMo-V2-Pro$16.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 70B, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or MiMo-V2-Pro?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 52/100 against MiMo-V2-Pro (42) and Apertus 70B (32). It leads on inputs & features. Apertus 70B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Apertus 70B, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or MiMo-V2-Pro?
Apertus 70B is cheaper at $0.82 input / $2.42 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). MiMo-V2-Pro costs $1.00 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) costs $1.25 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official xAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.22 per million tokens for Apertus 70B versus $1.50 for MiMo-V2-Pro (1.2× as much) and $1.56 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Apertus 70B has not been scored yet, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has not been scored yet and MiMo-V2-Pro has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 70B, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and MiMo-V2-Pro yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2-Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 65,536 for Apertus 70B. Maximum output per response: Apertus 70B up to 8,192, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) up to 30,000, MiMo-V2-Pro up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 70B accepts text; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts text, images and PDFs; MiMo-V2-Pro accepts text. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Apertus 70B publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and MiMo-V2-Pro is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2-Pro is the newest, released Mar 18, 2026. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) came out Mar 9, 2026; Apertus 70B came out Sep 2, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 70B Sep 2025, MiMo-V2-Pro Dec 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
