Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3.5 0.8B
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) comes out ahead, 66 to 57 and 45 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
xAIGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
66/100- ECI—
- Price$1.25 / $2.50
- Context1M
XiaomiMiMo-V2-Pro
45/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $3.00
- Context1.05M
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 0.8B
57/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context262K
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is our pick
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Qwen3.5 0.8B (57) and MiMo-V2-Pro (45). The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 priceMiMo-V2-ProMiMo-V2-Pro $1.50 · Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) $1.56 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Qwen3.5 0.8B unpriced
- Longest contextMiMo-V2-ProMiMo-V2-Pro 1,048,576 · Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) 1,000,000 · Qwen3.5 0.8B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and Qwen3.5 0.8BGrok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): Text, Images, PDFs · MiMo-V2-Pro: Text · Qwen3.5 0.8B: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingQwen3.5 0.8BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 0.8B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 70 | 35 | 70 |
| Context window | 40% | 60 | 61 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 66/100 | 45/100 | 57/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)xAI | MiMo-V2-ProXiaomi | Qwen3.5 0.8BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $1.25 | $1.00 (best) | — |
| Output | $2.50 (best) | $3.00 | — |
| Cached input | $0.20 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.56 | $1.50 (best) | — |
| Long-context rate | Over 200K: $2.50 / $5.00 | Same rate | — |
| Price source | Official xAI API | Median of 1 providers | — |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 30,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 81,920 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | OpenApache-2.0 |
| API model ID | grok-4.20-0309-non-reasoning | — | — |
| API providers | 13 (best) | 2 | 1 |
| Released | Mar 9, 2026 | Mar 18, 2026 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | 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.
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)$17.50
- MiMo-V2-Pro$16.00
- Qwen3.5 0.8B—
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning), MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.5 0.8B?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Qwen3.5 0.8B (57) and MiMo-V2-Pro (45). The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning), MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.5 0.8B?
MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $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 $1.50 per million tokens for MiMo-V2-Pro versus $1.56 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) (1× as much). Qwen3.5 0.8B has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has not been scored yet, MiMo-V2-Pro has not been scored yet and Qwen3.5 0.8B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning), MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.5 0.8B 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 262,144 for Qwen3.5 0.8B. Maximum output per response: Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) up to 30,000, MiMo-V2-Pro up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 0.8B up to 81,920 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts text, images and PDFs; MiMo-V2-Pro accepts text; Qwen3.5 0.8B accepts text, images and video. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.5 0.8B 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; Qwen3.5 0.8B came out Mar 2, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: 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.
