Claude Opus 5.5 vs MiMo-V2.5

Anthropic · US  |  Xiaomi · China · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 or anthropic reports it surpasses fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning. Pick MiMo-V2.5 for native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding or very low cost (~half the inference of the pro tier). Choose MiMo-V2.5 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Opus 5.5 if you want a managed API.

Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic, US) and MiMo-V2.5 (Xiaomi, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Claude Opus 5.5 is anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. MiMo-V2.5 is xiaomi's cheap omnimodal model — Pro-level agentic perception across image and video at a fraction of the cost. They diverge most on price and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecClaude Opus 5.5MiMo-V2.5
ProviderAnthropic (US) Xiaomi (China)
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026 April 22, 2026
Context window1M tokens (~1,500 pages) 1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)$4/$20 per 1M tokens $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens
Open weight?No — API only Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, image, code text, image, audio, video, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5

Claude Opus 5.5

Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching — and it is the newer of the two.

Anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning

Claude Opus 5.5

MiMo-V2.5 is comparatively weak here — not the deepest reasoning tier (see V2.5-Pro)

Pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok

Claude Opus 5.5

Claude Opus 5.5 lists pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok among its strengths; MiMo-V2.5 does not.

Native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding

MiMo-V2.5

Xiaomi's cheap omnimodal model — Pro-level agentic perception across image and video at a fraction of the cost — and it runs cheaper at $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens.

Very low cost (~half the inference of the Pro tier)

MiMo-V2.5

At $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5 ($4/$20 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.

Agent-framework integration

MiMo-V2.5

Xiaomi's cheap omnimodal model — Pro-level agentic perception across image and video at a fraction of the cost — and its weights are open while Claude Opus 5.5 is API-only.

Lowest cost at scale

MiMo-V2.5

At $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

MiMo-V2.5

At $0.14/$0.28 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Opus 5.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs

MiMo-V2.5

Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Opus 5.5 is API-only.

Anyone whose priority is performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5

Claude Opus 5.5

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding

MiMo-V2.5

That is its strongest area.

An enterprise with regional data-residency rules

Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5

Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.

Claude Opus 5.5: where it fits

Anthropic's September 22, 2026 update: Fable 5.1-level performance at 40% lower cost than Opus 5, with faster output and cheaper caching. Released September 22, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for performs at roughly Claude Fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than Opus 5, anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning, pricing cut to $4/$20 per million tokens (20% below Opus 5's $5/$25), cache reads down 60% to $0.20/MTok, and output speed increased over 30% versus Opus 5.

Its trade-offs are real: not a reasoning-ceiling upgrade over Fable 5.1 — pitched as matching its performance at lower cost, not beating it outright, like Opus 5, the headline 1M-token context is not uniformly available across every platform and plan — some API paths default to a smaller window, and first model in the 5.5 line; Anthropic has signaled Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5 are still weeks away, so the lower tiers of the family aren't out yet. At $4 in / $20 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

MiMo-V2.5: where it fits

Xiaomi's cheap omnimodal model — Pro-level agentic perception across image and video at a fraction of the cost. Released April 22, 2026 by Xiaomi, it is built for native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding, very low cost (~half the inference of the Pro tier), agent-framework integration, and 1M context for full documents in one pass.

Its trade-offs: not the deepest reasoning tier (see V2.5-Pro), and limited Western tooling and support. At $0.14 in / $0.28 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

The defining split here is open vs. closed. MiMo-V2.5 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Opus 5.5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.

Want both Claude Opus 5.5 and MiMo-V2.5 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Opus 5.5 leans toward performs at roughly claude fable 5.1's level on most work, at 40% lower typical workload cost than opus 5 while MiMo-V2.5 leans toward native omnimodal — strong image and video understanding, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Opus 5.5 is API-metered at $4/$20 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.

Can I use both Claude Opus 5.5 and MiMo-V2.5 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 5.5, MiMo-V2.5 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5?

Claude Opus 5.5 — released September 22, 2026, about 5 months after MiMo-V2.5.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.