Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, 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 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 25.0 points higher (46.8 vs 21.8) but costs 51× as much to run the benchmark ($3158 vs $61.9; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 21.8 | −53.4% MiMo-V2.5 is 53.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,157.66 | $61.93 | −98.0% MiMo-V2.5 is 98.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.46s | 41.73s | +298.9% MiMo-V2.5 is 298.9% 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 (Low, Default Fallback): 53.4% less intelligence, 98.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 298.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- 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 (Low, 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-low/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-low/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill