Model Comparison

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs MiMo-V2-Flash

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks. MiMo-V2-Flash is 40.0x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

Claude 3.7 Sonnet outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, Terminal-Bench), while MiMo-V2-Flash is better at 2 benchmarks (AIME 2025, SWE-Bench Verified).

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Mon Jun 01 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 3.7 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 30.0x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 50.0x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.7 Sonnet is more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Jun 01 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
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 3.7 Sonnet's 200,000 tokens. Claude 3.7 Sonnet can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Mon Jun 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2-Flash does not.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.7 Sonnet 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 3.7 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.7 Sonnet was released on 2025-02-24, while MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16.

MiMo-V2-Flash is 10 months newer than Claude 3.7 Sonnet.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Feb 24, 2025

1.3 years ago

MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

5 months ago

9mo 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 3.7 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. MiMo-V2-Flash is available from Xiaomi.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

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
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher GPQA score (84.8% vs 83.7%)
Higher Terminal-Bench score (35.2% vs 30.5%)
Xiaomi
Larger context window (256,000 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher AIME 2025 score (94.1% vs 54.8%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (73.4% vs 70.3%)
AnthropicClaude 3.7 Sonnet
XiaomiMiMo-V2-Flash
Compare in Playground

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs MiMo-V2-Flash.

Which is better, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks. Claude 3.7 Sonnet 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.

How does Claude 3.7 Sonnet compare to MiMo-V2-Flash in benchmarks?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores MATH-500: 96.2%, IFEval: 93.2%, MMMLU: 86.1%, GPQA: 84.8%, TAU-bench Retail: 81.2%. MiMo-V2-Flash scores AIME 2025: 94.1%, Arena-Hard v2: 86.2%, MMLU-Pro: 84.9%, HMMT 2025: 84.4%, GPQA: 83.7%.

Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet cheaper than MiMo-V2-Flash?

MiMo-V2-Flash is 30.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. MiMo-V2-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.30/M output via xiaomi.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and MiMo-V2-Flash?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet 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.

What are the main differences between Claude 3.7 Sonnet and MiMo-V2-Flash?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 256K), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.10/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.7 Sonnet and MiMo-V2-Flash?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.