Roboflow

Claude Opus 5 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro

Compare Claude Opus 5 and MiMo V2.6 Pro side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Open Prompt, Object Detection, and Classification.

Compare Claude Opus 5 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 5
Run to compare this model.
MiMo V2.6 Pro
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Anthropic

Claude Opus 5 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro on Vision Evals

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Claude Opus 5 leads 71.5% to 35.1%.

Overall, Claude Opus 5 averages 78.3% (#16 of 59) against 62.5% (#49 of 59) for MiMo V2.6 Pro.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper ($0.0008 vs $0.017 per sample), while Claude Opus 5 is faster (7.4s vs 8.5s per sample).

Claude Opus 5MiMo V2.6 Pro

Claude Opus 5 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro Comparison Table

Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 23, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 5MiMo V2.6 Pro
OrganizationAnthropicXiaomi
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Parameters1.02T total, 42B active
LicenseProprietaryMIT
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00$0.435
Output $/1M$25.00$0.870
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question Answering
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Image Tagging
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
78.3%
62.5%
Avg cost / sample$0.017$0.0008
Avg speed / sample7.38s8.47s
By task
Object Detection (low)
54.4%
$0.027
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)
70.3%
$0.0096
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)
90.6%
$0.0072
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)
93.2%
$0.020
90.7%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.5 to 91.9
$0.0008
OCR (high)
87.5%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.3 to 90.6
$0.0048
Data Extraction (low)
89.7%
$0.0080
81.1%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 81.4
$0.0005
Data Extraction (high)
80.4%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 82.5
$0.0013
Reasoning (low)
71.5%
$0.010
35.1%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 32.5 to 37.8
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
74.2%
$0.018
55.9%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 58.9
$0.0026

Claude Opus 5 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro: Overview

Claude Opus 5

Claude Opus 5 is a large language model with multimodal vision capabilities developed by Anthropic, released on July 24, 2026 as the fourth model in the Claude 5 family. It sits in the Opus tier of Anthropic's lineup, positioned below the Mythos-class Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models, and is framed by Anthropic as the go-to model for most knowledge work and automation tasks. The model approaches Fable 5's capabilities at roughly half the cost, priced at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens. It becomes the default model on Claude Max and the strongest model available on Claude Pro. The model ships with a 1 million token context window and an adjustable "effort" parameter that allows users to trade reasoning depth for speed and token savings. Early enterprise customers reported that Opus 5 achieved comparable performance to Opus 4.8's maximum-reasoning mode while generating significantly fewer tokens on average, and demonstrated higher accuracy on financial modeling tasks with fewer tool calls and less time.

Claude Opus 5 supports multimodal inputs including images and text, and is designed for agentic workflows, coding, scientific research, and complex enterprise tasks. Anthropic reports the model scores 10.2 percentage points higher than Opus 4.8 on an internal chemistry benchmark, making it the most capable generally available model for scientific research in the Claude lineup. Cyber classifiers on Opus 5 are designed to intervene approximately 85 percent less often than those on Fable 5, with fallback to Opus 4.8 when a classifier triggers. The model does not retain user data for 30 days, unlike Fable 5. It is available across Anthropic's platforms including Claude Code and Claude Cowork, as well as cloud partners.

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 5 performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 78.3% (#16 of 59) against 62.5% (#49 of 59) 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 5 leads with 71.5% 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 $0.0008 per sample against $0.017. Claude Opus 5 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 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.4s per inference against 8.5s. 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 OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.