Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Flash in 9 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multimodal, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 40.5 to 26.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 0.3% for Claude Sonnet 4 and 12% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 48.5 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 64K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $3 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 58 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 43.5 (#88), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 40% | 51.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1414 | 1504 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 64.9% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 61.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1637 |
| GSO | 4.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 46.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 655.35 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4: 38.5 (#31), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 33.1% | — |
| Cybench | 35% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 43.9% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 62% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 22.9 (#187), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0.3% | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1372 | 1482 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 45.5% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 73% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 40% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 3.1% | — |
| DTBench | 77.1% | — |
| LMCA | 29% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.69 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.2 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 43.3 (#80), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1375 | 1468 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 71.1% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 63% |
| Omni-MATH | 60.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 84.4% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 4: 41.8 (#108), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1501 |
| GPQA Diamond | 79.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 7.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 84.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 13.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.6% | — |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 26.2 (#121), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1191 | 1259 |
| GeoBench | 37% | — |
| VPCT | 34% | — |
| MindCube | 44.8% | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 46.7 (#156), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1333 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1350 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1363 | 1475 |
| LMArena Russian | 1355 | 1409 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1357 | 1456 |
| LMArena German | 1331 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1302 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1291 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 71.7 (#145), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1463 |
| IFEval | 84% | — |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 33.7 (#259), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1398 | 1463 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 46.9% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Claude Sonnet 4: 57.1 (#132), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1351 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1345 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1376 | 1451 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.4% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1483 | — |
| WildBench | 83.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 4 better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4 lists at $3 and $15.
Is Claude Sonnet 4 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 43.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4 has 58 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.