The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 19.1.

Anthropic · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 19.1, ranking #29 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet

  • you want predictable pricing at $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 45.7 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Anthropic
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
19.1
#210
45.7
#29
Reasoning
20.1
#191
43.2
#42
Coding
11.4
#158
36.6
#21
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$3.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
— / M
Context window
200,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool use
8.3#141
28.1#22
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

19 reported for Claude 3.5 Sonnet · 16 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash

No common benchmarks found

Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude 3.5 Sonnet specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude 3.5 Sonnet specifies output context (200,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash uses MIT.

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

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Sonnet was released on 2024-10-22, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 23 months newer than Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet

Oct 22, 2024

1.9 years ago

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

-1 days ago

1.9yr 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash.

Which is better, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 19.1. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude 3.5 Sonnet compare to MiMo-V2.6-Flash in benchmarks?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores GSM8k: 96.4%, DocVQA: 95.2%, AI2D: 94.7%, HumanEval: 93.7%, BIG-Bench Hard: 93.1%. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores CyberGym: 95.1%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 87.6%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, MiMo Cyber Bench: 77.2%, Toolathlon-Verified: 73.6%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (19.1 vs 45.7), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons