Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, 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 Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 35.8 points higher (57.6 vs 21.8) but costs 141× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $61.9; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.6 | 21.8 | −62.2% MiMo-V2.5 is 62.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,708.20 | $61.93 | −99.3% MiMo-V2.5 is 99.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 626.13s | 41.73s | −93.3% MiMo-V2.5 is 93.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.13 / $0.27 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback): 62.2% less intelligence, 99.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 93.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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 Opus 5.5 (Max, 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-opus-5-5/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill