XIMiMo-V2.5-Pro Open vs 
GPT-4.1 Paid
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs GPT-4.1 compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.
Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai
Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.
$0.87 /M outputNo per-token fees if you self-host
$8 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs GPT-4.1 specs
| Spec | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | GPT-4.1 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maker | Xiaomi | OpenAI | – |
| Type | Open-weight | Proprietary | XIMiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Context window | 1.1M tokens | 1M tokens | XIMiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Input price | $0.44/M · free self-host | $2/M | XIMiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Output price | $0.87/M · free self-host | $8/M | XIMiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Vision / multimodal | No | Yes | |
| Tool / function calling | Yes | Yes | = Tie |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No (API only) | XIMiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| License | Open weights | Proprietary | XIMiMo-V2.5-Pro |
Price gap & when to choose each
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ~9.2× cheaper than GPT-4.1 on output tokens ($0.87 vs $8 per M tokens).
- You want to self-host or run on your cloud
- You need the longer 1.1M context window
- You prioritize data privacy & control
- You want the lowest operating costs
- You are building open or reproducible AI
- You want frontier performance through a managed API
- You value reliability & ecosystem
- You don't want to manage infrastructure
Feature comparison
| Capability | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Open weights (downloadable) | ✓ | ✗ |
| Self-hostable | ✓ | ✗ |
| Runs fully offline | ✓ | ✗ |
| Vision / multimodal | ✗ | ✓ |
| Tool / function calling | ✓ | ✓ |
| 1M+ context window | ✓ | ✓ |
Benchmarks: MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs GPT-4.1
Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).
Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.
How MiMo-V2.5-Pro and GPT-4.1 score
| Criterion | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | GPT-4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost-efficiency | 5.0 | 3.5 |
| Context window | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| Openness | 5.0 | 1.5 |
| Self-hosting | 5.0 | 1.0 |
| Multimodality | 3.5 | 5.0 |
Scores come from live data — output price (cost), context length, open vs closed weights (openness & self-hosting) and vision/tool support (multimodality). Raw task quality isn't scored here; it depends on your benchmark — see the verdict.
What each model is
MiMo-V2.5-Pro Open
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is Xiaomi’s flagship model, delivering strong performance in general agentic capabilities, complex software engineering, and long-horizon tasks, with top rankings on benchmarks such as ClawEval, GDPVal, and SWE-bench Pro....
GPT-4.1 Paid
GPT-4.1 is a flagship large language model optimized for advanced instruction following, real-world software engineering, and long-context reasoning. It supports a 1 million token context window and outperforms GPT-4o and...
Other models in these families
These variants are tracked but not compared here — one page per family keeps the comparison readable.
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro as good as GPT-4.1?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but GPT-4.1 may still lead on the hardest reasoning and agentic work. The gap keeps narrowing — benchmark both on your actual use case before deciding.
Can I run MiMo-V2.5-Pro locally?
Yes. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has open weights, so you can self-host it on your own GPUs or run it via a low-cost API. GPT-4.1 is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.
How much cheaper is MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs $0.87/M output vs $8/M for GPT-4.1 — roughly 9x cheaper via API, and free if you self-host.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs GPT-4.1 — which should I pick in 2026?
Choose MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose GPT-4.1 if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.
People also compare
Explore more open-source AI
Browse the full open-source model leaderboard, thousands of tools and live benchmarks — all in one place.
Open the leaderboard →