Claude Fable 5 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro
Wins 3 of 6 areas
Agents · Reasoning · Images and charts
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Coding · Long documents
Claude Fable 5 wins more areas, narrowly.MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper and better at coding.
Scores updated · 23 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20Claude Fable 52 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own21Claude Fable 52 of 3 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video10Claude Fable 51 of 1 test
- CodingWriting and fixing software01MiMo V2.6 Pro1 of 3 tests · 2 ties
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01MiMo V2.6 Pro1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Images and charts and long documents rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
MiMo V2.6 Pro costs 98% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Fable 5 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+30.5points ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+7.6points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+6.1points ahead
Where MiMo V2.6 Pro pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+23points ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+5.3points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+4points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 23 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingMiMo V2.6 Pro
- Terminal-Bench 2.1MiMo V2.6 Pro by 5.384.689.9+5.3
- LMArena · WebDevtie16251624tie
- SciCodetie6160.9tie
AgentsClaude Fable 5
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Claude Fable 5 by 7.642.434.8+7.6
- GDPValMiMo V2.6 Pro by 3.755.559.2+3.7
- OSWorld-VerifiedClaude Fable 5 by 38582+3
ReasoningClaude Fable 5
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Fable 5 by 6.155.549.4+6.1
- CritPtClaude Fable 5 by 228.626.6+2
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Fable 5 by 30.565.334.9+30.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationMiMo V2.6 Pro by 2336.459.4+23
Images and chartsClaude Fable 5
- LMArena · VisionClaude Fable 5 by 60 rating points13261266+60 rating
Other results11 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- Program BenchClaude Fable 5 by 59.886.326.5+59.8
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Fable 5 by 34.943.38.4+34.9
- Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1Claude Fable 5 by 1924.75.7+19
- GDP (Surge AI)Claude Fable 5 by 10.629.819.2+10.6
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Claude Fable 5 by 9.644.534.9+9.6
- GDPval-AA 2.1MiMo V2.6 Pro by 78 rating points15951673+78 rating
- Agents' Last ExamMiMo V2.6 Pro by 5.925.731.6+5.9
- JobBenchMiMo V2.6 Pro by 4.657.462+4.6
- AA IntelligenceClaude Fable 5 by 3.349.646.3+3.3
- DeepSWE 1.1MiMo V2.6 Pro by 1.97071.9+1.9
- Toolathlon VerifiedClaude Fable 5 by 177.976.9+1
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Fable 5 or MiMo V2.6 Pro?
Claude Fable 5 wins three of the six areas where both have results: agents, reasoning and images and charts. MiMo V2.6 Pro wins coding and long documents, and costs 98% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
MiMo V2.6 Pro. It wins 1 of the 3 coding tests both models report; Claude Fable 5 wins none, and 2 are ties.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Fable 5 costs $10.00 per million input tokens and $50.00 per million output tokens; MiMo V2.6 Pro costs $0.43 and $0.87. That makes MiMo V2.6 Pro about 98% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 23 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 12 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 11 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.