The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5.5 vs MiMo-V2-Flash

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 30.7. MiMo-V2-Flash is 53.3x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 30.7, ranking #1 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 5.5 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, MiMo-V2-Flash is roughly 53.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Opus 5.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 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 Opus 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 59.7 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose MiMo-V2-Flash

  • cost matters — it's about 53.3x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic
MiMo-V2-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
59.7
#1
30.7
#123
Reasoning
57.8
#1
30.8
#119
Coding
51.7
#1
17.5
#124
Agents
44.5
#2
8.1
#140
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$4.00 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$20.00 / M
$0.30 / M
Context window
1,000,000
256,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Opus 5.5
MiMo-V2-Flash
Math
42.5#5
29.4#86
Tool use
32.9#2
6.2#151
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

31 reported for Claude Opus 5.5 · 15 for MiMo-V2-Flash

1 shared

Claude Opus 5.5 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (SWE-bench Multilingual), while MiMo-V2-Flash is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2-Flash costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($4.00/1M tokens) is 40.0x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 5.5 ($20.00/1M tokens) is 66.7x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 5.5 is more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input tokens$4.00
Output tokens$20.00
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

Claude Opus 5.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to MiMo-V2-Flash's 256,000 tokens. Claude Opus 5.5 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Opus 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2-Flash does not.

Claude Opus 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Opus 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 5.5 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 Opus 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5.5 was released on 2026-09-22, while MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16.

Claude Opus 5.5 is 9 months newer than MiMo-V2-Flash.

Claude Opus 5.5

Sep 22, 2026

0 days ago

9mo newer
MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

9 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Opus 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while MiMo-V2-Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Opus 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiMo-V2-Flash's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 5.5

Jun 2026

MiMo-V2-Flash

—

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 5.5 is available from Anthropic. MiMo-V2-Flash is available from Xiaomi.

Claude Opus 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $4.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $20.00/1M

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→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 5.5 and MiMo-V2-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5.5
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5.5 vs MiMo-V2-Flash.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Claude Opus 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 59.7 to 30.7. Claude Opus 5.5 is made by Anthropic and MiMo-V2-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 5.5 compare to MiMo-V2-Flash in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.2%, Global-MMLU: 94.3%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 93.9%, MILU: 93.1%, ArXivMath: 91.2%. 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 Opus 5.5 cheaper than MiMo-V2-Flash?

MiMo-V2-Flash is 40.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00/M input and $20.00/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 Opus 5.5 and MiMo-V2-Flash?

Claude Opus 5.5 supports 1.0M 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 Opus 5.5 and MiMo-V2-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (59.7 vs 30.7), context window (1.0M vs 256K), input pricing ($4.00 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 Opus 5.5 and MiMo-V2-Flash?

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons