# Claude Opus 4.7 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

> Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 44.8 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-mimo-v2-5-pro
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 27

## Summary

- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 8 categories and MiMo-V2.5-Pro in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.5 to 38.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 54% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 22% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
- 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.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 58.4 | 44.8 |
| Rank | 17 | 70 |
| Context | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $5 | $0.43 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $0.87 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.7: 59.9 (#10)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.0 (#58)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1557 | 1477 |
| SciCode | 54.5% | 50.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1519 | 1502 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,323 | 899.8 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| GSO | 44.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | — |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#8)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 40.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 43.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 21% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1233 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,937 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.7: 53.7 (#24)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 25.9 (#124)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 39% | 34.4% |
| CritPt | 12% | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1507 | 1487 |
| DTBench | 94.7% | 84.5% |
| LMCA | 52.2% | 29.5% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 93.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 72.8% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 19% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 28% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.39 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.7: 66.5 (#20)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 38.6 (#84)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 54% | 22% |
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1480 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 70.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 73.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#20)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 41.5 (#100)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | 1501 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.7: 41.5 (#29)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.7: 57.5 (#9)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.3 (#33)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1481 | 1449 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1530 | 1507 |
| LMArena French | 1505 | 1489 |
| LMArena German | 1494 | 1455 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | 1418 |
| LMArena Korean | 1466 | 1436 |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | 1450 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1497 | 1470 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.7: 78.6 (#9)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.6 (#21)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | 1477 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.7: 46.1 (#24)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#38)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | 1482 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.7: 75.3 (#8)
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.5 (#47)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1465 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | 1440 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | 1493 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | 1208 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1506 | 1477 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 44.8 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 18× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 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 Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

### Is Claude Opus 4.7 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 47.0 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 Opus 4.7 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27.