Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs MiMo-V2-Flash

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. MiMo-V2-Flash is 10.7x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

3 benchmarks

Claude 3.5 Haiku outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while MiMo-V2-Flash is better at 3 benchmarks (GPQA, MMLU-Pro, SWE-Bench Verified).

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2-Flash costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($0.80/1M tokens) is 8.0x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($4.00/1M tokens) is 13.3x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Haiku is more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerXiaomi
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiMo-V2-Flash accepts 256,000 input tokens compared to Claude 3.5 Haiku's 200,000 tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Haiku is licensed under a proprietary license, while MiMo-V2-Flash uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16.

MiMo-V2-Flash is 14 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.5 years ago

MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

3 months ago

1.2yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic. MiMo-V2-Flash is available from Xiaomi.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $5.00/1M

MiMo-V2-Flash

xiaomi logo
Xiaomi
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Xiaomi
Larger context window (256,000 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher GPQA score (83.7% vs 41.6%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (84.9% vs 65.0%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (73.4% vs 40.6%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs MiMo-V2-Flash

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude 3.5 Haiku is made by Anthropic and MiMo-V2-Flash is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. MiMo-V2-Flash scores AIME 2025: 94.1%, Arena-Hard v2: 86.2%, MMLU-Pro: 84.9%, HMMT 2025: 84.4%, GPQA: 83.7%.
MiMo-V2-Flash is 8.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku costs $0.80/M input and $4.00/M output via bedrock. MiMo-V2-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.30/M output via xiaomi.
Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and MiMo-V2-Flash supports 256K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (200K vs 256K), input pricing ($0.80 vs $0.10/M), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.