Claude Fable 5.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Claude Fable 5.1 
MiMo-V2.6-Pro Verdict
- Claude Fable 5.1 (xhigh) leads on quality: 70.8 vs 64.3.
- Claude Fable 5.1 (xhigh) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, knowledge.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is stronger in long context, reasoning.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is 36× cheaper ($0.548 vs $20.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (xhigh) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.8 | 64.3 |
| Agents & tools score | 68.0 | 55.1 |
| Coding score | 71.4 | – |
| Composite score | 93.0 | 84.8 |
| Knowledge score | 82.5 | 66.8 |
| Long context score | 67.3 | 69.1 |
| Reasoning score | 80.2 | 88.8 |
| Blended price $/M | $20.00 | $0.548 |
| Output speed | 61 tok/s | 54 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 122.7 s | 39.8 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1.0M |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 57.9% | – |
| SciCode | 60.9% | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | 53.2 | 46.3 |
| AA-LCR | 83.0% | 86.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 42.4 | 8.4 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 93.4% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 58.7% | 49.4% |
| SciCode (AA) | 60.9% | 60.9% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | 67.8% |
| Vals Index | – | 59.7 |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 96.5% | – |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.0% | – |
| CritPt | 31.1% | 26.6% |
| GDPval (AA) | 61.0% | 58.7% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | 45.8% | – |
| Code Migration | – | 43.0% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | – | 62.9% |
| Finance Agent v2 | – | 58.3% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark | – | 10.8% |
| Legal Research Bench | – | 47.1% |
| Terminal-Bench Science | – | 2.9% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | – | 85.2% |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | 60.0% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoring | 56.7% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | 67.0% | – |
| LMCA | 65.1% | – |
| DTBench | 97.6% | – |
| CursorBench | 51.6% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 55.0% | 34.9% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | 91.0% | – |
| AutomationBench | 57.8% | 58.6% |
| GDP.pdf | 26.2% | 19.2% |
| Harvey LAB | 93.3% | – |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 66.2% | 34.9% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 29.4% | 59.4% |
| AA-Briefcase | 1669 | 1522 |
Data as of 2026-09-23. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Fable 5.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro: questions
- Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
- Claude Fable 5.1 (xhigh) leads on quality: 70.8 vs 64.3. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Fable 5.1 (xhigh) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-23, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro for agentic tasks?
- Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in agentic tasks (68 vs 55 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper: $0.548 against $20.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
- Claude Fable 5.1 streams faster: 61 against 54 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.0M against 1M tokens.