Model Comparison
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
vs. MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Anthropic, Xiaomi
Recommended Pick
Xi MiMo-V2.5-Pro 11 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
100.0 value score
58.1 reasoning / $0.54/1M
Lowest Price
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
$0.43/1M input price
Best Reasoning
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
58.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
53.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is 14.4x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort).
Speed gap
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) generates about 1.1x as many tokens per second as MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Reasoning gap
MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) by 0.9 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) leads MiMo-V2.5-Pro by 7.6 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Xiaomi
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) | Top Pick Xi MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $6.25/1M | $0.43/1M |
| Output Cost | $25.00/1M | $0.87/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $10.94/1M | $0.54/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Release Date | Apr 16, 2026 | Apr 22, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 50.3 tok/s | 46.3 tok/s |
| TTFT | 853ms | 2367ms |
| Latency | 853ms | 45558ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 4.9 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 57.2 | 58.1 |
| Intelligence | 51.8 | 53.8 |
| Coding | 53.1 | 45.5 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 88.5% | 86.6% |
| HLE | 31.2% | 33.8% |
| SciCode | 50.1% | 50.2% |
| LCR | 67.0% | 73.3% |
| IFBench | 43.6% | 79.9% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 74.0% | 94.2% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 54.5% | 43.2% |
Key Takeaways
MiMo-V2.5-Pro offers the best value at $0.43/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the strongest reasoning profile with a 58.1 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort) reaches a 53.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude Opus 4.7 (Non-reasoning, High Effort)
- Code generation
- Software development
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
