MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Claude Haiku 5.5

Overall
48
vs
Overall
70

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
482m 13s
5.9K, 89% thinking3.9K, 78% thinking
7025.5s
Agents
474m 48s
8.7K, 84% thinking3.7K, 61% thinking
6139.5s
Structured Extraction
601m 26s
3.4K, 87% thinking2.6K, 83% thinking
9013.5s
Coding
242m 58s
10.7K, 95% thinking6.8K, 76% thinking
8630.6s
Grounded Answers
621m 9s
3.2K, 89% thinking2.2K, 78% thinking
7613.9s
Instruction Following
591m 23s
4.5K, 86% thinking4.3K, 82% thinking
9431.5s
Business Logic
571m 52s
7.1K, 92% thinking5.5K, 95% thinking
6726.0s
Security & permissions
711m 41s
3.6K, 86% thinking2.7K, 70% thinking
6723.4s
Diagnosis & investigation
02m 54s
6.2K, 86% thinking2.3K, 50% thinking
1725.5s

What you'd run

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

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

MiMo-V2.6-ProClaude Haiku 5.5
025507510050100150Perfect run4870

Every test case

153 test cases

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

6 won by MiMo-V2.6-Pro45 won by Claude Haiku 5.5102 tied