Roboflow

Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 and MiMo V2.6 Pro side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Classification, OCR, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Opus 4.8
Run to compare this model.
MiMo V2.6 Pro
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro on Vision Evals

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on 4 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 53.0% to 35.1%.

Overall, Claude Opus 4.8 averages 58.3% (#38 of 63) against 50.3% (#54 of 63) for MiMo V2.6 Pro.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper ($0.0011 vs $0.021 per sample), while Claude Opus 4.8 is faster (7.7s vs 9.5s per sample).

Claude Opus 4.8MiMo V2.6 Pro

Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 17, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 4.8MiMo V2.6 Pro
OrganizationAnthropicXiaomi
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknown1.02T total, 42B active
LicenseProprietaryMIT
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termsfree for commercial use
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00$0.435
Output $/1M$25.00$0.870
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
58.3%
50.3%
Avg cost / sample$0.021$0.0011
Avg speed / sample7.66s9.45s
By task
Object Detection (low)
38.6%
$0.026
42.0%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 40.9 to 43.1
$0.0014
Object Detection (high)–
46.7%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 45.7 to 47.3
$0.0030
Counting (low)
54.0%
$0.0076
50.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.6 to 52.7
$0.0005
Counting (high)–
59.0%
±5.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 52.7 to 63.5
$0.0016
Identification (low)
84.4%
$0.0067
76.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 78.1
$0.0004
Identification (high)–
78.1%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.9 to 81.3
$0.0012
OCR (low)
61.5%
$0.025
48.6%
$0.0012
by category
Single value
53.0%
Transcription
70.8%
Structured JSON
82.4%
Text localization
24.2%
Single value
37.0%
Transcription
68.2%
Structured JSON
67.7%
Text localization
18.7%
OCR (high)
62.1%
$0.038
49.9%
$0.0034
by category
Single value
54.8%
Transcription
67.0%
Structured JSON
83.5%
Text localization
23.6%
Single value
40.4%
Transcription
59.9%
Structured JSON
70.2%
Text localization
16.8%
Reasoning (low)
53.0%
$0.0078
35.1%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 32.5 to 37.8
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
52.3%
$0.0078
55.9%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 58.9
$0.0026

Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro: Overview

Claude Opus 4.8

Claude Opus 4.8 is Anthropic's most capable generally available large language model, released on May 28, 2026 as an incremental upgrade to Claude Opus 4.7. The model accepts text and image inputs and produces text outputs, with a 1 million token context window on the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, and Google Cloud Vertex AI (200k tokens on Microsoft Foundry) and up to 128k max output tokens. It uses adaptive thinking and supports adjustable effort tiers — high by default, with extra and max tiers available for more demanding tasks. A fast mode operates at approximately 2.5x standard speed. The model is described by Anthropic as a hybrid reasoning model designed for advanced coding, agentic workflows, long-context reasoning, and professional knowledge work.

Key behavioral improvements over Opus 4.7 include substantially reduced rates of unreported code flaws, improved honesty in self-assessment, and better tool-calling reliability. On Anthropic's Super-Agent benchmark, Opus 4.8 completes every case end-to-end, and it scores 84% on Online-Mind2Web for computer-use and browser-agent tasks. It achieves 88.6% on SWE-bench Verified and 69.2% on SWE-bench Pro. Alongside the model, Anthropic launched Dynamic Workflows in Claude Code (research preview), which enables Claude to orchestrate hundreds of parallel subagents for codebase-scale tasks such as large migrations. The Messages API was also updated to accept mid-task system messages without breaking prompt caching, improving support for long-running agentic pipelines.

MiMo V2.6 Pro

MiMo V2.6 Pro is the flagship omni-modal foundation model in Xiaomi's MiMo V2.6 series, released as open weights alongside a Flash variant and a 9B distillation of Qwen3.5. It uses a sparse mixture-of-experts transformer with 1.02 trillion total parameters and roughly 42 billion activated per token, paired with a hybrid attention design that interleaves sliding-window and global attention layers to support a context window of about one million tokens. Dedicated encoders handle non-text inputs, including a vision encoder of roughly 681 million parameters and an audio tokenizer stack, so the model accepts text, images, video, and audio and returns text.

Post-training centers on large-scale reinforcement learning across thousands of interactive environments, combined with agentic grading, self-correction cold start, and a multi-prefix multi-teacher on-policy distillation stage that extends behavior to tasks that are hard to verify automatically. The resulting model targets long-horizon agentic work such as software engineering, terminal and computer-use operation, tool calling, cybersecurity analysis, and visual coding, and it reports gains over the prior MiMo generation on SWE-bench Verified, Terminal Bench, and internal visual coding and cyber benchmarks.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Opus 4.8 performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the five vision tasks and averages 58.3% (#38 of 63) against 50.3% (#54 of 63) for MiMo V2.6 Pro. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Claude Opus 4.8 leads with 53.0% against 35.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0011 per sample against $0.021. Claude Opus 4.8 is priced at $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output; MiMo V2.6 Pro is priced at $0.43 per 1M input tokens and $0.87 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Opus 4.8 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.7s per inference against 9.5s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.