The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 23.9. MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 34.3x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 23.9, ranking #29 overall.

On price, MiMo-V2.6-Flash is roughly 34.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

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

Choose Claude 3.7 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 45.6 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 34.3x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • 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 3.7 Sonnet
Anthropic
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
23.9
#172
45.6
#29
Reasoning
23.1
#168
42.5
#45
Coding
13.6
#139
36.7
#21
Agents
4.9
#151
33.1
#26
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$3.00 / M
$0.14 / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
$0.28 / M
Context window
200,000
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool use
17.9#70
24.7#29
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Claude 3.7 Sonnet · 16 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash

No common benchmarks found

Claude 3.7 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

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 21.4x more expensive than MiMo-V2.6-Flash ($0.14/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 53.6x more expensive than MiMo-V2.6-Flash ($0.28/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.7 Sonnet is more expensive than MiMo-V2.6-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Input tokens$0.14
Output tokens$0.28
Best providerXiaomi
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude 3.7 Sonnet's 200,000 tokens. Only Claude 3.7 Sonnet specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude 3.7 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.7 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 3.7 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.7 Sonnet was released on 2025-02-24, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 19 months newer than Claude 3.7 Sonnet.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Feb 24, 2025

1.6 years ago

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

0 days ago

1.6yr 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-V2.6-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-V2.6-Flash

xiaomi logo
Xiaomi
Input Price:Input: $0.14/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.28/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude 3.7 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash.

Which is better, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 23.9. Claude 3.7 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 3.7 Sonnet compare to MiMo-V2.6-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-V2.6-Flash scores CyberGym: 95.1%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 87.6%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, MiMo Cyber Bench: 77.2%, Toolathlon-Verified: 73.6%.

Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet cheaper than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 21.4x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs $0.14/M input and $0.28/M output via xiaomi.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports 1.0M 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-V2.6-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (23.9 vs 45.6), context window (200K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.14/M), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.7 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons