Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.1 vs MiMo-V2-Pro
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 4 categories and MiMo-V2-Pro in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 36.7 to 22.0.
- MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 42.4 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 2026-03-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 32K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 48 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69), MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.4 (#76)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | 1433 |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1476 |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | 785.17 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), MiMo-V2-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70), MiMo-V2-Pro: 21.3 (#200)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1457 |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 25.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 45.9% |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 37.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
Math MiMo-V2-Pro leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), MiMo-V2-Pro: 36.7 (#104)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1447 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93), MiMo-V2-Pro: 40.8 (#106)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1479 |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), MiMo-V2-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.9 (#77)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1416 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1455 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1470 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1417 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1366 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1401 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1427 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1458 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.2 (#46)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1444 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#133)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1455 |
| CL-bench | — | 15.7% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 6.9% |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.9 (#67)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1436 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1415 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1456 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than MiMo-V2-Pro?
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or MiMo-V2-Pro?
MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4.1 or MiMo-V2-Pro better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (44.3 vs 43.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and MiMo-V2-Pro share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Pro has 23.