# Claude 2.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

> MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-2-1-vs-mimo-v2-6-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 51.9 to 10.2.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 48.5 |
| Rank | 345 | 55 |
| Context | — | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | — | $0.14 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.28 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327)
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1637 |
| SciCode | — | 51.3% |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1504 |

## Reasoning

- Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221)
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1482 |
| DTBench | 51% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |

## Math

- Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315)
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 63% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1468 |

## Knowledge

- Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292)
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1501 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude 2.1: —
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |

## Multilingual

- Claude 2.1: —
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1511 |
| LMArena French | — | 1475 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1409 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1456 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 2.1: —
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1463 |

## Long Context

- Claude 2.1: —
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1463 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 2.1: —
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1451 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 2.1 better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 2.1 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.