Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (High, 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 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 15.7 points higher (53.6 vs 37.9) but costs 20× as much to run the benchmark ($2172 vs $110; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 37.9, and MiMo-V2.6-Flash when 37.9 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.6 | 37.9 | −29.3% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 29.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,172.43 | $109.55 | −95.0% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 95.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 33.81s | 49.53s | +46.5% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 46.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback): 29.3% less intelligence, 95.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 46.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Claude Opus 5.5 (High, 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-opus-5-5-high/mimo-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-high/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill