Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 45.2 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 7.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher in 5 categories and MiMo-V2.5-Pro in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5 leads 66.2 to 40.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 77% for Claude Sonnet 5 and 22% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 54.6 | 45.2 |
| Released | 2026-06-29 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 51 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.5 (#26), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1541 | 1479 |
| SciCode | 54.3% | 50.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1483 | 1503 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,463 | 899.8 |
| DeepSWE | 53.8% | — |
| FrontierCode | 42.7% | — |
| CursorBench | 34.1% | — |
| GSO | 37.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 68.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.8 (#18), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 54.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 65.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1194 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,378 | — |
Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 49.1 (#39), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 75.1% | 34.4% |
| CritPt | 16.9% | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | 1488 |
| DTBench | 92.5% | 84.5% |
| LMCA | 50% | 29.5% |
| SimpleBench | 60.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 35% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 35% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 60% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.21 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 66.2 (#27), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 77% | 22% |
| LMArena Math | 1467 | 1481 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 65.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 94.7% | — |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 55.6 (#47), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1490 | 1503 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5: 42.4 (#31), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1274 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.9% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1466 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 53.8 (#55), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1449 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1507 |
| LMArena French | 1460 | 1488 |
| LMArena German | 1440 | 1458 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1412 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1437 |
| LMArena Russian | 1451 | 1450 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1437 | 1471 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 76.3 (#41), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1452 | 1477 |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 5: 44.8 (#55), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1483 |
Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5: 69.2 (#25), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1442 | 1465 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1416 | 1440 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1794 | 1493 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1236 | 1208 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1454 | 1477 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5 better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Claude Sonnet 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.6 to 45.2 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 7.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 5 lists at $2 and $10.
Is Claude Sonnet 5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 47.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share?
27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5 has 51 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27.