Devstral Small 2 vs GLM-4.7-FlashX vs MiMo-V2-Pro
Devstral Small 2 comes out ahead, 67 to 61 and 54 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Mistral AIDevstral Small 2
67/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.30
- Context262K
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.7-FlashX
61/100- ECI—
- Price$0.07 / $0.40
- Context200K
XiaomiMiMo-V2-Pro
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.435 / $0.87
- Context1.05M
Devstral Small 2 is our pick
Devstral Small 2 is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against GLM-4.7-FlashX (61) and MiMo-V2-Pro (54). It leads on inputs & features. MiMo-V2-Pro wins on context window. 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 priceDevstral Small 2Devstral Small 2 $0.15 · GLM-4.7-FlashX $0.152 · MiMo-V2-Pro $0.544 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2-ProMiMo-V2-Pro 1,048,576 · Devstral Small 2 262,144 · GLM-4.7-FlashX 200,000 tokens
- Widest inputsDevstral Small 2Devstral Small 2: Text, Images · GLM-4.7-FlashX: Text · MiMo-V2-Pro: Text
- Self-hostingDevstral Small 2 and GLM-4.7-FlashXPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Devstral Small 2 | GLM-4.7-FlashX | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 89 | 89 | 62 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 50 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 32 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 67/100 | 61/100 | 54/100 |
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 | Devstral Small 2Mistral AI | GLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu) | MiMo-V2-ProXiaomi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.07 (best) | $0.435 |
| Output | $0.30 (best) | $0.40 | $0.87 |
| Cached input | — | $0.01 | $0.0036 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.15 (best) | $0.152 | $0.544 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Z.AI API | Official Xiaomi API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 200,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | glm-4.7-flashx | mimo-v2-pro |
| API providers | 1 | 8 (best) | 4 |
| Released | Dec 9, 2025 | Jan 19, 2026 | Mar 18, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Dec 2025 | Apr 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.
- Devstral Small 2$1.60
- GLM-4.7-FlashX$1.50
- MiMo-V2-Pro$6.09
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Devstral Small 2, GLM-4.7-FlashX or MiMo-V2-Pro?
Devstral Small 2 is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against GLM-4.7-FlashX (61) and MiMo-V2-Pro (54). It leads on inputs & features. MiMo-V2-Pro wins on context window. 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, Devstral Small 2, GLM-4.7-FlashX or MiMo-V2-Pro?
Devstral Small 2 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). GLM-4.7-FlashX costs $0.07 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); MiMo-V2-Pro costs $0.435 input / $0.87 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Devstral Small 2 versus $0.152 for GLM-4.7-FlashX (1× as much) and $0.544 for MiMo-V2-Pro (3.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Devstral Small 2 has not been scored yet, GLM-4.7-FlashX 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 Devstral Small 2, GLM-4.7-FlashX 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 262,144 for Devstral Small 2 and 200,000 for GLM-4.7-FlashX. Maximum output per response: Devstral Small 2 up to 262,144, GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072, MiMo-V2-Pro up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Devstral Small 2 accepts text and images; GLM-4.7-FlashX accepts text; MiMo-V2-Pro accepts text. Devstral Small 2 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Devstral Small 2 and GLM-4.7-FlashX publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; MiMo-V2-Pro is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2-Pro is the newest, released Mar 18, 2026. GLM-4.7-FlashX came out Jan 19, 2026; Devstral Small 2 came out Dec 9, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Devstral Small 2 Dec 2025, GLM-4.7-FlashX Apr 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 Oct 4, 2026.
