# Claude Opus 5.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

> Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 46.7 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-mimo-v2-6-pro
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 92.4 to 37.9.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 68.5 | 46.7 |
| Rank | 3 | 55 |
| Context | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $4 | $0.43 |
| Output $/M | $20 | $0.87 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 5.5: 71.4 (#1)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 53.2 (#27)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1820 | 1618 |
| LMArena Coding | 1545 | 1538 |
| FrontierCode | 54.4% | — |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | — |
| SciCode | 66.9% | — |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 30.4 (#76)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1545 | 1511 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 92.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | — |
| DTBench | 98.9% | — |
| LMCA | 68.2% | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.9 (#91)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1497 |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.0 (#85)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1564 | 1548 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | — |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.2 (#40)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1265 |
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 57.0 (#15)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1513 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1572 | 1532 |
| LMArena Russian | 1532 | 1481 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#10)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1535 | 1490 |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#26)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1540 | 1500 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.9 (#32)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1518 | 1491 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1538 | 1465 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1520 | 1463 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 46.7 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

### Is Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 53.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 14.