Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or MiMo-V2.6-Flash by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 8.9 points higher (46.8 vs 37.9) but costs 29× as much to run the benchmark ($3158 vs $110; 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 37.9, and MiMo-V2.6-Flash when 37.9 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 37.9 | −19.0% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 19.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,157.66 | $109.55 | −96.5% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 96.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.76s | 48.63s | +352.0% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 352.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback): 19.0% less intelligence, 96.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 352.0% 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-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback)MiMo-V2.6-FlashToday'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-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-low/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill