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-Pro for complex software engineering (top-ranked on swe-bench pro) or long-horizon autonomous tasks (1,000+ tool calls). Choose MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro (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-Pro is xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost. They diverge most on price and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: MiMo-V2.5-Pro is about 9.2× cheaper on input ($0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: Claude Opus 5.5 is the newer model by about 5 months (released September 22, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
Claude Opus 5.5
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Xiaomi (China)
Released
September 22, 2026
April 22, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$4/$20 per 1M tokens
$0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not 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 — Claude Opus 5.5 lists anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning among its strengths; MiMo-V2.5-Pro does not.
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-Pro does not.
Complex software engineering (top-ranked on SWE-bench Pro): MiMo-V2.5-Pro — Xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost — and it runs cheaper at $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens.
Long-horizon autonomous tasks (1,000+ tool calls): MiMo-V2.5-Pro — Xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost — and its weights are open while Claude Opus 5.5 is API-only.
Strong on GDPVal and ClawEval: MiMo-V2.5-Pro — MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists strong on GDPVal and ClawEval among its strengths; Claude Opus 5.5 does not.
Lowest cost at scale: MiMo-V2.5-Pro — At $0.435/$0.87 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-Pro — At $0.435/$0.87 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-Pro — 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 complex software engineering (top-ranked on swe-bench pro): MiMo-V2.5-Pro — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro — 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-Pro: where it fits
Xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost. Released April 22, 2026 by Xiaomi, it is built for complex software engineering (top-ranked on SWE-bench Pro), long-horizon autonomous tasks (1,000+ tool calls), strong on GDPVal and ClawEval, and agent-framework integration.
Its trade-offs: benchmark rankings are largely vendor-stated, and limited Western adoption and tooling. At $0.435 in / $0.87 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-Pro 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.
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro leans toward complex software engineering (top-ranked on swe-bench pro), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 5.5, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro?
Claude Opus 5.5 — released September 22, 2026, about 5 months after MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Claude Opus 5.5 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
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-Pro for complex software engineering (top-ranked on swe-bench pro) or long-horizon autonomous tasks (1,000+ tool calls). Choose MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro (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-Pro is xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost. They diverge most on price and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: MiMo-V2.5-Pro is about 9.2× cheaper on input ($0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
▸Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: Claude Opus 5.5 is the newer model by about 5 months (released September 22, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Claude Opus 5.5
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Xiaomi (China)
Released
September 22, 2026
April 22, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$4/$20 per 1M tokens
$0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not 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
Claude Opus 5.5 lists anthropic reports it surpasses Fable 5.1 on agentic coding, knowledge work, computer use, visual chart recognition, and multidisciplinary reasoning among its strengths; MiMo-V2.5-Pro does not.
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-Pro does not.
Complex software engineering (top-ranked on SWE-bench Pro)
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost — and it runs cheaper at $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens.
Long-horizon autonomous tasks (1,000+ tool calls)
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost — and its weights are open while Claude Opus 5.5 is API-only.
Strong on GDPVal and ClawEval
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists strong on GDPVal and ClawEval among its strengths; Claude Opus 5.5 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
At $0.435/$0.87 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-Pro
At $0.435/$0.87 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-Pro
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 complex software engineering (top-ranked on swe-bench pro)
→ MiMo-V2.5-Pro
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro
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-Pro: where it fits
Xiaomi's flagship agentic model — autonomous, long-horizon software engineering at a fraction of frontier cost. Released April 22, 2026 by Xiaomi, it is built for complex software engineering (top-ranked on SWE-bench Pro), long-horizon autonomous tasks (1,000+ tool calls), strong on GDPVal and ClawEval, and agent-framework integration.
Its trade-offs: benchmark rankings are largely vendor-stated, and limited Western adoption and tooling. At $0.435 in / $0.87 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-Pro 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-Pro 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.
Is Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro leans toward complex software engineering (top-ranked on swe-bench pro), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Opus 5.5, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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-Pro?
Claude Opus 5.5 — released September 22, 2026, about 5 months after MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.