The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 4.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 38.2.

Anthropic · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 38.2, ranking #29 overall.

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

Choose Claude Opus 4.5

  • you want predictable pricing at $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 45.7 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes agents — 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 Opus 4.5
Anthropic
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
38.2
#69
45.7
#29
Reasoning
40.0
#56
43.2
#42
Coding
28.3
#61
36.6
#21
Agents
17.7
#76
33.3
#25
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$5.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
— / M
Context window
200,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Opus 4.5
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool use
21.1#56
28.1#22
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Claude Opus 4.5 · 16 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash

No common benchmarks found

Claude Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5 specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4.5 specifies output context (64,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.5
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 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 Opus 4.5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Opus 4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.5 was released on 2025-11-24, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 10 months newer than Claude Opus 4.5.

Claude Opus 4.5

Nov 24, 2025

10 months ago

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

-1 days ago

10mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Opus 4.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-03-31, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Opus 4.5's training data extends to 2025-03-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiMo-V2.6-Flash's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 4.5

Mar 2025

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4.5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 4.5
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 38.2. Claude Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5 compare to MiMo-V2.6-Flash in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores Tau2 Telecom: 98.2%, MMMLU: 90.8%, Tau2 Retail: 88.9%, GPQA: 87.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 80.9%. 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 Opus 4.5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (38.2 vs 45.7), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4.5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude Opus 4.5 is developed by Anthropic and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons