Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (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 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback): 5.6% more intelligence, 77.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 700.2% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 35.9 | 37.9 | +5.6% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 5.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $482.13 | $109.55 | −77.3% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 77.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.19s | 49.53s | +700.2% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 700.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (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-sonnet-5-5-low/mimo-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5-low/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill