Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs MiMo-V2-Pro

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Pro costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

MiMo-V2-Pro Xiaomi

43.0

Rank #103 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 7 categories and MiMo-V2-Pro in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 42.6 to 22.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 52.5% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 25.8% for MiMo-V2-Pro.
  • MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5 and MiMo-V2-Pro specifications
Claude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
ProviderAnthropicXiaomi
Noometry Index50.543.0
Released2025-11-012026-03-18
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1.05M
Max output64K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.43
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.87
Results tracked6923

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.8 (#83)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena WebDev14941433
LMArena Coding15041476
ALE-Bench1,025785.17
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), MiMo-V2-Pro: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%25.8%
LMArena Hard Prompts14761457
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
SimpleBench62%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
Thematic Generalization—45.9%
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Math14631447
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%—
ProofBench36%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Expert14871478
GPQA Diamond86%—
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), MiMo-V2-Pro: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Non-English14381416
LMArena Chinese14701456
LMArena French14711469
LMArena German14491417
LMArena Japanese14161366
LMArena Korean14241400
LMArena Russian14471427
LMArena Spanish14581457

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following14781445

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
CL-bench21.1%15.7%
LMArena Longer Query14801455
CL-bench Life—6.9%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Text14511436
LMArena Creative Writing14451415
LMArena Multi-Turn14661456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than MiMo-V2-Pro?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Pro costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 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 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or MiMo-V2-Pro better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 43.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and MiMo-V2-Pro share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Pro has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper