Claude Haiku 5.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Overall
70
vs
Overall
48

Claude Haiku 5.5 is clearly better. It wins 45 of the 51 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. MiMo-V2.6-Pro spends 1.7× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
7025.5s
3.9K, 78% thinking5.9K, 89% thinking
482m 13s
Agents
6139.5s
3.7K, 61% thinking8.7K, 84% thinking
474m 48s
Structured Extraction
9013.5s
2.6K, 83% thinking3.4K, 87% thinking
601m 26s
Coding
8630.6s
6.8K, 76% thinking10.7K, 95% thinking
242m 58s
Grounded Answers
7613.9s
2.2K, 78% thinking3.2K, 89% thinking
621m 9s
Instruction Following
9431.5s
4.3K, 82% thinking4.5K, 86% thinking
591m 23s
Business Logic
6726.0s
5.5K, 95% thinking7.1K, 92% thinking
571m 52s
Security & permissions
6723.4s
2.7K, 70% thinking3.6K, 86% thinking
711m 41s
Diagnosis & investigation
1725.5s
2.3K, 50% thinking6.2K, 86% thinking
02m 54s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
225 tok/s (better)
55 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
1M
1.1M (better)
Cost per run
$0.42 (better)
$1.80
Cost per case
$0.0028 (better)
$0.012
Time per case
25.5s (better)
2m 13s
Quantization
—
BF16
Harness
openrouter
openrouter

The race

1 lead change

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Claude Haiku 5.5MiMo-V2.6-Pro
025507510050100150Perfect run7048

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

45 won by Claude Haiku 5.56 won by MiMo-V2.6-Pro102 tied