BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases8

Claude Opus 5 vs Mimo v2 Omni

Full profiles: Claude Opus 5 (Anthropic) and Mimo v2 Omni (Xiaomi): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 11 sources

As of 29 Oct 2026, Claude Opus 5 is ahead of Mimo v2 Omni on quality (65.5 vs 58.9 on the BenchLeader Index). Claude Opus 5 leads in every category we measure both in.

Key facts (as of 29 Oct 2026)

  • Claude Opus 5 scores 65.5 on the BenchLeader Index and Mimo v2 Omni scores 58.9 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
  • Claude Opus 5 costs $10.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
  • Of the 13 benchmarks both models have, Claude Opus 5 leads 13 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
Claude Opus 5 benchmarks max Anthropic Mimo v2 Omni benchmarks XiaomiOpen in the comparison tool

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingClaude Opus 570 vs 62 category score; Arena Coding 1528 vs 1488High
Agents & tool useEither64 vs 65 category scoreEither
MathsClaude Opus 570 vs 61 category score; Arena Maths 1517 vs 1434High
ReasoningClaude Opus 569 vs 62 category score; Arena Hard Prompts 1515 vs 1458Medium
Long documentsClaude Opus 565 vs 61 category score; AA-LCR v1.1 79.3% vs 73.3%Medium
Images and other mediaClaude Opus 568 vs 56 category score; MMMU-Pro 84.7% vs 73.9%High
Chat quality (human preference)Claude Opus 568 vs 61 on Arena votesMedium
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Claude Opus 5 (max) leads on quality: 65.5 vs 58.9.
  • Claude Opus 5 (max) is stronger in coding, human preference, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
  • Mimo v2 Omni is stronger in agents & tools, instruction following.

At a glance

SpecClaude Opus 5Mimo v2 Omni
DeveloperAnthropicXiaomi
Released24 Jul 202627 Mar 2026
Context window (tokens)1,000,000256,000
Compared atClaude Opus 5 (max)Mimo v2 Omni
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$5.00 / $25.00 / $0.500–

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryClaude Opus 5 (max)Mimo v2 OmniLeader
Reasoning69.261.9Claude Opus 5
Coding70.062.1Claude Opus 5
Agents & tools64.364.8level
Maths70.461.0Claude Opus 5
Knowledge65.0–not comparable
Instruction following–66.5not comparable
Human preference68.461.1Claude Opus 5
Multimodal67.655.9Claude Opus 5
Long context64.561.4Claude Opus 5

Where sources disagree

Across the 13 benchmarks both have, Claude Opus 5 leads 13, Mimo v2 Omni leads 0. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Opus 5 ahead.

Overall indexClaude Opus 5 (max)Mimo v2 OmniLeader
BenchLeader Index65.558.9Claude Opus 5
Arena Text14911431Claude Opus 5

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.

MeasureClaude Opus 5 (max)Mimo v2 Omni
Blended price per 1M tokens$10.00–
Input / output per 1M$5.00 / $25.00– / –
Cached input per 1M$0.500–
Price per task: chat reply$0.0095–
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.075–
Price per task: code edit$0.068–
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.400–
Price per task: structured extraction$0.015–
Output speed56 tok/s–
Time to first answer43.9 s–
Time to a complete answer52.8 s–

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Claude Opus 5 (max) scores 65.5 and takes 44 s to its first answer token; Claude Opus 5 scores 65.2 in 3 s, Claude Opus 5 (high) scores 64.4 in 14 s. Mimo v2 Omni scores 58.9. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

121 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherClaude Opus 5 (max)Mimo v2 Omni
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader65.558.9
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader64.364.8
Coding scoreBenchLeader70.062.1
Human preference scoreBenchLeader68.461.1
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader65.0–
Long context scoreBenchLeader64.561.4
Maths scoreBenchLeader70.461.0
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader67.655.9
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader69.261.9
Instruction following scoreBenchLeader–66.5
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$10.00–
Output speedBenchLeader56 tok/s–
Time to first answerBenchLeader43.9 s–
Context windowBenchLeader1,000,000 tokens256,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub93.9%–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench80.6%†–
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)15151458
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench91.2%–
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis93.2%85.5%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis54.9%22.6%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI93.4%†–
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize97.5%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize90.4%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize30.2%†–
CritPtArtificial Analysis29.1%0.9%
MysteryMechanismVals AI37.4%†–
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub43.0%–
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub59.0%–
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub63.3%–
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub97.6%–
ForecastBenchForecastBench66.5%–
BTF-3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub12.0%†–
Coding
SciCodeSciCode56.4%–
WeirdMLWeirdML91.8%–
FrontierCodeCognition53.4%–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15281488
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)1690–
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench81.5%–
LiveCodeBenchVals AI89.0%†–
Show all 121 benchmarks
MetricPublisherClaude Opus 5 (max)Mimo v2 Omni
Coding
IOIVals AI84.3%†–
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI97.0%†–
Code MigrationVals AI57.5%†–
ProgramBenchVals AI3.0%†–
Vibe Code Bench 1-100Vals AI28.5%†–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI88.4%†–
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAScale AI SEAL63.2%†–
SWE Atlas: Test WritingScale AI SEAL62.2%†–
DeepSWE v1.1Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub73.7%–
CursorBenchCursor46.6%–
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub2164.6†–
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub52.0%–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis49.0%–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis89.1%–
Startrise FrontendStartrise82.3%†–
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench51.8%–
OSWorld-Verified 2.0OSWorld31.4%–
APEX-AgentsMercor65.8%–
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)8.2–
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench65.2%–
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis–35.6%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis–88.0%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI84.6%†–
MCP AtlasScale AI SEAL85.8%†–
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL57.0%†–
τ³-bench Bankingτ²-bench48.7%–
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis42.1%–
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis53.8%–
CUA-benchVals AI9.0%–
CyberBenchVals AI65.4%†–
Finance Agent v2Vals AI58.6%†–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI6.7%†–
Legal Research BenchVals AI55.3%†–
SkillsBenchVals AI60.4%†–
SREBenchVals AI12.2%†–
Tax Agent BenchVals AI45.5%†–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI53.5%†–
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI27.1%†–
Time Horizon Index: KSPVals AI18.8%†–
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)1214†–
BALROGBALROG63.4%–
PostTrainBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub35.0%†–
GBAEvalEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub79.6%†–
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs11181.9†–
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis56.6%–
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis21.6%–
EnterpriseOps-GymArtificial Analysis47.5%–
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1655–
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis28.6%–
DeepSec-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis25.9%–
FACTS SearchGoogle85.3%†–
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub85.6%–
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub73.2%–
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub98.9%–
ProofBenchVals AI99.0%–
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench95.7%–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)15171434
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub59.9%–
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench74.5%–
MMLU-ProVals AI91.6%†–
LegalBenchVals AI87.0%†–
CorpFinVals AI73.2%†–
TaxEvalVals AI75.1%†–
BioMysteryBenchVals AI79.3%†–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI73.6%†–
MedCodeVals AI63.6%†–
MedScribeVals AI91.0%†–
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI76.9%†–
DrugDiscoveryBenchScale AI SEAL53.7%–
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub45.7%–
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub24.0%–
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench88.7%–
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench63.8%–
IFBenchArtificial Analysis–67.3%
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)14951428
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)14911431
EQ-Bench 4EQ-Bench1365†–
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14741395
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)14871452
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)15031450
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1320†1228
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis84.7%73.9%
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI89.9%†–
MortgageTaxVals AI72.1%†–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub30.4%†–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis79.3%73.3%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1490†–
MLCRArtificial Analysis11.1%–
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub163.9†–
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench80.1%–
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis50.825.1
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis333.7269
Vals RSI IndexVals AI33.0%–
Vals Science IndexVals AI47.9%†–
Vals Multimodal IndexVals AI73.9%†–
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL16.8%†–

Data as of 2026-10-29. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • Claude Opus 5 (max): BenchLeader Index 66.3 → 65.5.
  • Claude Opus 5 (max): 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Mimo v2 Omni: 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Claude Opus 5 (max): BenchLeader Index 66.8 → 66.3.
  • Claude Opus 5 (max): 1 new result (Vals RSI Index).
  • Claude Opus 5 (max): 1 score revision.
  • Claude Opus 5 (max): 1 new result (ForecastBench); 1 score revision.
  • Mimo v2 Omni: BenchLeader Index 57.5 → 58.7.
  • Claude Opus 5 (max): 4 new results (GDPval-AA v2.1, normalised score, AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracy, AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucination…).
  • Mimo v2 Omni: 7 score revisions.

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for coding · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Claude Opus 5 vs Mimo v2 Omni: questions

Is Claude Opus 5 better than Mimo v2 Omni?
Claude Opus 5 (max) leads on quality: 65.5 vs 58.9. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Opus 5 (max) is ahead overall as of 29 Oct 2026, but check the category scores for your use.
Is Claude Opus 5 or Mimo v2 Omni better for coding?
Claude Opus 5 scores higher in coding (70 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Arena Coding, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 1528 for Claude Opus 5 against 1488 for Mimo v2 Omni.
Is Claude Opus 5 or Mimo v2 Omni better for agents and tool use?
They are level in agentic tasks (64 vs 65 on the category index).
Which is better for long documents?
Claude Opus 5 scores higher on long-context benchmarks (65 vs 61). Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1,000,000 against 256,000 tokens for Mimo v2 Omni.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Claude Opus 5 vs Mimo v2 Omni?
Across the 13 benchmarks both have, Claude Opus 5 leads 13, Mimo v2 Omni leads 0. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Opus 5 ahead.
More questions (1)
When was Claude Opus 5 released?
Claude Opus 5 was released on 24 Jul 2026.