Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) by Anthropic or MiMo-V2.6-Flash by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 8.4 points higher (37.9 vs 29.5) but costs 3.2× as much to run the benchmark ($110 vs $34.3; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick MiMo-V2.6-Flash when you need intelligence above 29.5, and Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) when 29.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 29.5 | 37.9 | +28.5% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 28.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $34.31 | $109.55 | +219.3% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 3.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.19s | 49.53s | +386.1% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 386.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low): 28.5% more intelligence, 219.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 386.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low)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-haiku-5-5-low/mimo-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-low/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill