Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) vs MiMo-V2.5
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) by Anthropic or MiMo-V2.5 by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) scores 27.9 points higher (49.7 vs 21.8) but costs 95× as much to run the benchmark ($5868 vs $61.9; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 21.8, and MiMo-V2.5 when 21.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) | MiMo-V2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 49.7 | 21.8 | −56.1% MiMo-V2.5 is 56.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,867.76 | $61.93 | −98.9% MiMo-V2.5 is 98.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 37.50s | 53.94s | +43.8% MiMo-V2.5 is 43.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.13 / $0.27 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.5 vs Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh): 56.1% less intelligence, 98.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 43.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- 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 (Xhigh)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-xhigh/mimo-v2-5-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-xhigh/mimo-v2-5-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill