Head-to-head comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs. MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Compare published benchmark results from matching versions and cohorts, API pricing, and technical specifications. Any documented test setup differences remain visible.

shared result series: 16
distinct benchmarks: 16
latest retrieval: 2026-09-29

First modelSecond model

Specifications

General specifications

Release date, availability, context window, architecture, and published parameter counts at a glance. Undisclosed details remain marked as unavailable.

Specifications for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Attribute	Claude Sonnet 4.6	MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Provider	Anthropic	Xiaomi
Released	Feb 2026	Apr 27, 2026
Availability	Active	Open Source
Model type	Proprietary	Open Weights
Parameters	Not published	1T, 42B active
Architecture	Not published	Mixture of Experts
Context window	1,000,000 tokens	1,000,000 tokens
Knowledge cutoff	August 2025	Not published
Technical sources	Model, Context	Model

Pricing

API pricing compared

The table compares official standard API rates per 1M tokens, including published cache pricing. Batch, fast, priority, regional surcharges, tool calls, and cloud platform pricing are excluded.

API pricing for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Price type	Claude Sonnet 4.6	MiMo-V2.5-Pro
API input	$3	$0.43
API output	$15	$0.87
Cache read	$0.3	$0.
Cache write (5 min.)	$3.75	Not listed
Cache write (1 hr.)	$6	Not listed
Price verified	09/22/2026 Source	07/31/2026 Source

Claude Sonnet 4.6MiMo-V2.5-Pro

API inputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

Claude Sonnet 4.6$3

MiMo-V2.5-Pro$0.435

API outputUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

Claude Sonnet 4.6$15

MiMo-V2.5-Pro$0.87

Cache readUSD per 1M tokens, base tier

Claude Sonnet 4.6$0.3

MiMo-V2.5-Pro$0.004

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Pricing by provider

Direct developer pricing and provider endpoint tariffs routed through OpenRouter are listed separately. Prices are in USD per 1M tokens. Context-dependent direct tiers plus regional, Flex, Priority, and other OpenRouter tariffs remain individually identifiable.

Provider pricing for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Model	Provider	Purchase route and tariff	Input per 1M tokens	Output per 1M tokens	Source
Claude Sonnet 4.6	Anthropic	Direct from developerStandard API	Lowest listed price: $3	Lowest listed price: $15	Source09/22/2026
	Amazon Bedrock	Via OpenRouteramazon-bedrock/eu-west-1	$3.3	$16.5	Source10/05/2026
	Amazon Bedrock	Via OpenRouteramazon-bedrock/global	Lowest listed price: $3	Lowest listed price: $15	Source10/05/2026
	Amazon Bedrock	Via OpenRouteramazon-bedrock/us	$3.3	$16.5	Source10/05/2026
	Anthropic	Via OpenRouteranthropic	Lowest listed price: $3	Lowest listed price: $15	Source10/05/2026
	Azure	Via OpenRouterazure/global	Lowest listed price: $3	Lowest listed price: $15	Source10/05/2026
	Claude Platform on AWS	Via OpenRouterclaude-on-aws	Lowest listed price: $3	Lowest listed price: $15	Source10/05/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/europe	$3.3	$16.5	Source10/05/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/global	Lowest listed price: $3	Lowest listed price: $15	Source10/05/2026
	Google	Via OpenRoutergoogle-vertex/us-east5	$3.3	$16.5	Source10/05/2026
MiMo-V2.5-Pro	Xiaomi	Direct from developerStandard API	$0.435	$0.87	Source07/31/2026
	AtlasCloud	Via OpenRouteratlas-cloud/fp8	$0.435	$0.87	Source10/05/2026
	DigitalOcean	Via OpenRouterdigitalocean	$0.48	$1.8	Source10/05/2026
	GMICloud	Via OpenRoutergmicloud/bf16	Lowest listed price: $0.3045	Lowest listed price: $0.609	Source10/05/2026
	Novita	Via OpenRouternovita	$0.4802	$0.9605	Source10/05/2026
	StreamLake	Via OpenRouterstreamlake	$0.522	$1.044	Source10/05/2026
	Xiaomi	Via OpenRouterxiaomi/fp8	$0.435	$0.87	Source10/05/2026

Performance

Shared benchmarks

Only published results with the same benchmark version, task, metric, and comparison cohort are paired. Different reasoning levels, agents, harnesses, or output limits appear directly in the table.

Capability profile from matched benchmarks

Each axis averages directly matched benchmark families. A value of 100 means the stronger value within this pair, not a universal quality score.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Coding: 100 / 78.8 (4 benchmark families)

Reasoning: 100 / 96.5 (1 benchmark family)

Knowledge: 100 / 96.9 (1 benchmark family)

Finance: 100 / 83.3 (5 benchmark families)

Legal: 100 / 58.9 (3 benchmark families)

Agentic tasks: 100 / 100 (1 benchmark family)

Overall: 100 / 81 (1 benchmark family)

16 matched rows from 16 benchmark families were considered. The radar shows 7 of 7 comparable categories.

Claude Sonnet 4.6MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Code MigrationOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.639.892 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro21.557 %

CorpFin v2Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.665.307 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro61.422 %

EMBOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.660.154 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro55.228 %

Finance Agent (v2)Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.651.035 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro41.502 %

GPQA DiamondOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.685.606 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro82.576 %

Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkOverall · Task fully resolved. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.65 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro2.083 %

Legal Research BenchOverall · All-pass. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.638.462 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro15.865 %

LegalBenchOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.682.12 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro77.129 %

LiveCodeBench v6Overall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.682.091 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro81.354 %

MMLU-ProOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.687.341 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro84.595 %

SWE-bench VerifiedOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.677.4 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro74 %

Tax Agent BenchOverall. Higher is better. No documented setup difference

Claude Sonnet 4.664.854 %

MiMo-V2.5-Pro34.787 %

Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Benchmark scores for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Benchmark and task	Claude Sonnet 4.6	MiMo-V2.5-Pro	Source
Code MigrationOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner39.892 %	21.557 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
CorpFin v2Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner65.307 %	61.422 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 08/12/2026
EMBOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner60.154 %	55.228 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
Finance Agent (v2)Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner51.035 %	41.502 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
GPQA DiamondOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner85.606 %	82.576 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkOverall · Task fully resolved Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: task resolution rateScoring: Higher is better	Winner5 %	2.083 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
Legal Research BenchOverall · All-pass Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: all-pass rateScoring: Higher is better	Winner38.462 %	15.865 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
LegalBenchOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner82.12 %	77.129 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
LiveCodeBench v6Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner82.091 %	81.354 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
MMLU-ProOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner87.341 %	84.595 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
SWE-bench VerifiedOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner77.4 %	74 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
Tax Agent BenchOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner64.854 %	34.787 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
TaxEval v2Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Winner77.106 %	73.794 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/01/2026
Terminal-Bench 2.1Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is better	Tie57.303 %	Tie57.303 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
Vals IndexOverall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 2Metric: weighted index scoreScoring: Higher is better	Winner50.593 %	40.974 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Overall Test details No documented difference in the test setupVersion: 1.1Metric: accuracyScoring: Higher is betterSettings: Harness: OpenHands	Winner51.476 %	34.113 %	Vals AI Source details Data as of: 09/27/2026
Key to the marks:better valuebetter, but not conclusivetie

Our model tests

Our tests

Compare how the models respond to the same prompt. Each test shows the latest attempt, with no subsequent fixes to the generated code. Earlier runs remain available in the test details. These results do not contribute to an overall score.

Pelican on a bicycle

A community classic for free-form SVG drawing.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

The response reached the token limit. No complete recording is available.

Reasoning (requested): high

Current attempt

Run date: 2 Oct 2026
API provider: openrouter
Requested API model: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6
API model reported in response: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6
Reasoning setting: high
Pinned endpoint: Anthropic | anthropic/claude-4.6-sonnet-20260217
Temperature: Provider default
Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens
Test protocol: community-visual-tests-v1
Technical checks: Failed
Response time: 110 s

Not yet visually reviewed. A successful recording does not confirm correct physics or full compliance with the prompt.

Earlier attempts (1)

1 Oct 2026API request failedReasoning setting: high

MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Reasoning (requested): high

Current attempt

Run date: 1 Oct 2026
API provider: openrouter
Requested API model: xiaomi/mimo-v2.5-pro
API model reported in response: xiaomi/mimo-v2.5-pro
Reasoning setting: high
Pinned endpoint: Xiaomi | xiaomi/mimo-v2.5-pro-20260422
Temperature: Provider default
Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens
Test protocol: community-visual-tests-v1
Technical checks: Passed, not a quality rating
Response time: 110.7 s

Visually reviewed. This individual test does not establish overall model quality.

Earlier attempts (1)

7 Sept 2026API request failedReasoning setting: high

Prompt and test conditions

Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle

Token limit including reasoning: 8,192 tokens

Task origin (Simon Willison)

How to read this comparison

Winning one benchmark is not an overall verdict

Your workload, budget, and required context length matter most. A coding benchmark says little about visual understanding or agent performance.

The standard price table uses direct developer rates. The provider comparison labels OpenRouter endpoints, regions, and special tariffs separately.

Every result links to its measurement source and retrieval date. Labels distinguish vendor reports, official benchmark leaderboards, and independent evaluations. Disputed or archived results are excluded.

More matchups

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro with other leading models using the same data and benchmark logic.

View the complete LLM comparison