The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Claude Opus 5 leads the LLM Stats Score 54.6 to 45.7.

Anthropic · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 54.6 to 45.7, ranking #5 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Claude Opus 5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 54.6 and ranks #5 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Flash

  • 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 5
Anthropic
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
54.6
#5
45.7
#29
Reasoning
53.6
#4
43.2
#42
Coding
41.7
#10
36.6
#21
Agents
39.5
#7
33.3
#25
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$5.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Opus 5
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool use
27.8#24
28.1#22
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Claude Opus 5 · 16 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash

2 shared

Claude Opus 5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, Terminal-Bench 4.0), while MiMo-V2.6-Flash is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Opus 5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 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 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 5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 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 5

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 5 was released on 2026-07-24, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 2 months newer than Claude Opus 5.

Claude Opus 5

Jul 24, 2026

1 months ago

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

-1 days ago

2mo 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 Opus 5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 5
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude Opus 5 leads the LLM Stats Score 54.6 to 45.7. Claude Opus 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 5 compare to MiMo-V2.6-Flash in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 5 scores BrowseComp: 90.8%, BioMysteryBench: 90.1%, OSWorld 2.0: 70.6%, DeepSWE 1.1: 68.8%, Humanity's Last Exam: 64.7%. 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 5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude Opus 5 supports 1.0M 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 5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (54.6 vs 45.7), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 5 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Claude Opus 5 is developed by Anthropic and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons