Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or MiMo-V2.5 by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallbac… scores 29.4 points higher (51.2 vs 21.8) but costs 85× as much to run the benchmark ($5242 vs $61.9; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.2 | 21.8 | −57.4% MiMo-V2.5 is 57.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,241.59 | $61.93 | −98.8% MiMo-V2.5 is 98.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 34.32s | 41.73s | +21.6% MiMo-V2.5 is 21.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.13 / $0.27 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback): 57.4% less intelligence, 98.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 21.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- MiMo-V2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Medium) scores 34.50 for $56.4.
Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback)MiMo-V2.5Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-high/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-high/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill