Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Anthropic against Xiaomi, compared on context, price, and verified benchmark results.

Catalog record checked September 26, 2026Individual provider fields may changeEvidence confidence: High — see receipts below

Anthropic

Claude Fable 5.1

Frontier

Xiaomi

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Frontier · Open weights

AI model capability comparison
Specification	Claude Fable 5.1	Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Provider
Provider	Anthropic	Xiaomi
Tier
Tier	Frontier	Frontier
Context window
Context window	1M	Winner: 1.05M
Max output
Max output	128K	Not verifiedUnverified
Input / 1M tokens
Input / 1M tokens	$10	Winner: $0.435
Output / 1M tokens
Output / 1M tokens	$50	Winner: $0.87
Weights
Weights	Closed	Open
Parameters
Parameters	Not disclosedUnverified	1.02T total / 42B active (MoE)
Reasoning levels
Reasoning levels	adaptive	Not verifiedUnverified
Modalities
Modalities	text, image	text, image, video, audio
License
License	Not disclosedUnverified	MIT
API model id
API model id	claude-fable-5-1	mimo-v2.6-pro
Released
Released	September 1, 2026	September 21, 2026
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index [max] (2026-09-26)
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index [max] (2026-09-26)	53.4	Not verifiedUnverified
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (2026-09-26)
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (2026-09-26)	Not verifiedUnverified	46.3
Humanity's Last Exam (2026-09-01)
Humanity's Last Exam (2026-09-01)	65	Not verifiedUnverified
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (2026-09-26)
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (2026-09-26)	Winner: 91.4	89.9
Terminal-Bench 4.0 [max] (2026-09-26)
Terminal-Bench 4.0 [max] (2026-09-26)	52	Not verifiedUnverified
DeepSWE 1.1 (2026-09-03)
DeepSWE 1.1 (2026-09-03)	67.4	Winner: 71.9

Prices are USD per million tokens at standard rates, excluding batch and caching discounts. Bold indicates the better figure where one is objectively better. Values we could not confirm from the provider are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.

Benchmark receipts

Where each score comes from, and how far it can be compared across models.

2026-09-26
Artificial Analysis Terminal-Bench 4.0 (independent AA run, part of Intelligence Index v4.3.2)
Agentic terminal work: long multi-step tasks executed in a sandboxed shell environment.
Comparable with caveatNOT comparable with Terminal-Bench 2.x or 3.0 — 4.0 uses a new, non-overlapping task set. Within 4.0, scores from different harnesses (tbench.ai agent entries vs Artificial Analysis runs) are not interchangeable.
2026-09-26
Artificial Analysis Terminal-Bench 2.1 (independent, Terminus 2, max effort)
Agentic terminal work: multi-step tasks executed in a sandboxed shell environment.
Comparable with caveatNot comparable with Terminal-Bench 3.0 or 4.0 (different task sets) or v1; harness configuration (container, time limits) also shifts results.
2026-09-26
Artificial Analysis
Composite index blending reasoning, knowledge, and coding evals into one 0–100 score.
Comparable with caveatOnly same-version scores are comparable. v4.3.2 was rebaselined (the top score fell from 66 on v4.1.1 to ~58), so v4.1.1 figures must not be compared with v4.3.2 figures — check measuredAt.
2026-09-21
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6 announcement (vendor)
Agentic software engineering: pass@1 on real repo tasks with reported cost per completed task.
Directly comparable
2026-09-03
OpenAI GPT-6 Astra launch chart (independent cross-vendor; Fable 5.1 not on the official Datacurve leaderboard)
Agentic software engineering: pass@1 on real repo tasks with reported cost per completed task.
Directly comparable
2026-09-01
Anthropic Fable 5.1 announcement (vendor, with tools; 60.9 no tools) — Anthropic's later Opus 5.5 table lists 65.6; conflict preserved
Frontier-knowledge ceiling: extremely hard multi-domain questions written to be near-impossible without deep expertise.
Comparable with caveatSubset/tool configurations (text-only vs with-tools) differ between vendors and materially change scores; must match configuration to compare.

Pricing tiers

Claude Fable 5.1: Priced with Fable 5 at $10/$50 per MTok; cache reads cut 75% to $0.25/MTok. Adaptive thinking always on (default effort high); knowledge cutoff Jun 2026. Sibling Mythos 5.1 launched the same day.

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro: $0.435/$0.87 per MTok (cache hit $0.0036; cache writes free for a limited time) — unchanged from V2.5-Pro. UltraSpeed mode (mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed) costs $4.35/$8.70. Open weights (MIT) as MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL.

FrontierRecord checked September 26, 2026

Claude Fable 5.1

Claude Fable 5.1 is Anthropic's model for the most demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work at $10/$50 — Anthropic now recommends Opus 5.5 as the default for most workloads.

Best for

Frontier agents
Hardest reasoning work
Fable 5 workloads at the same price

Watch out

Costs 2.5x Opus 5.5 per token and trails it on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (53.4 vs 57.6, v4.3.2); reserve it for the hardest long-horizon work.

FrontierOpen weightsRecord checked September 26, 2026

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is Xiaomi's open-weight (MIT) 1.02T MoE with omni-modal input and a 1M context — the top open-weight model on the Artificial Analysis index at under $1 per million output tokens.

Best for

Open-weight frontier work
Omni-modal input
Cheap long-context API

Watch out

Max output is not verified; vendor benchmark claims (DeepSWE 71.9) are not yet independently reproduced.

When the cheaper one wins

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper on output at $0.87 per million tokens against $50 for Claude Fable 5.1 — about 57×. Use the cheaper tier for classification, extraction, summarisation, and any task where the expensive model’s extra score does not change the accepted output. The expensive one only pays if your hardest task actually fails on the cheap tier. These are standard-tier API rates, excluding batch and cache discounts.

Run the model picker

Evidence confidence: High

How strong and complete the evidence behind this comparison is — not a prediction of which model is better.

Pricing verified on both sides — Input and output rates are verified for both models.
2/5 core specs verified on both sides — Not published for at least one side: max output, parameter count, reasoning levels.
3 shared named benchmarks with differing scores — Measured on: Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Terminal-Bench 2.1, DeepSWE 1.1.
Verified within the last 90 days — Newest catalog check was 2 days ago.
Both models carry source citations — Each side has at least two catalog sources on record.

Source receipts

Each catalog figure was checked against the provider or an independent second source on the date shown.

Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic pricing — Fable 5.1/Mythos 5.1 $10/$50 (accessed 2026-09-03)
Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic models overview — Fable 5.1 (1M context, 128K output) (accessed 2026-09-03)
Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic — Claude Fable and Mythos 5.1 announcement (accessed 2026-09-26)
Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic models overview — Opus 5.5 default; Fable 5.1 for demanding reasoning (accessed 2026-09-26)
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro: Xiaomi — MiMo-V2.6 (pricing, benchmarks) (accessed 2026-09-26)
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro: Hugging Face — XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL (MIT, 1.02T/42B, 1M) (accessed 2026-09-26)

Related comparisons

Diving deeper on one model? Claude Fable 5.1 · Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Common questions

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro cheaper for input?

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.435 per million input tokens, against $10 for Claude Fable 5.1 — roughly 23× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; Claude Fable 5.1 has tiered pricing: Priced with Fable 5 at $10/$50 per MTok; cache reads cut 75% to $0.25/MTok. Adaptive thinking always on (default effort high); knowledge cutoff Jun 2026. Sibling Mythos 5.1 launched the same day. Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro has tiered pricing: $0.435/$0.87 per MTok (cache hit $0.0036; cache writes free for a limited time) — unchanged from V2.5-Pro. UltraSpeed mode (mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed) costs $4.35/$8.70. Open weights (MIT) as MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro cheaper for output?

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.87 per million output tokens, against $50 for Claude Fable 5.1 — roughly 57× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; Claude Fable 5.1 has tiered pricing: Priced with Fable 5 at $10/$50 per MTok; cache reads cut 75% to $0.25/MTok. Adaptive thinking always on (default effort high); knowledge cutoff Jun 2026. Sibling Mythos 5.1 launched the same day. Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro has tiered pricing: $0.435/$0.87 per MTok (cache hit $0.0036; cache writes free for a limited time) — unchanged from V2.5-Pro. UltraSpeed mode (mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed) costs $4.35/$8.70. Open weights (MIT) as MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL.

Which has the larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts 1.05M tokens against 1M for Claude Fable 5.1. This only matters if you routinely send very long documents or large codebases.

Should I use Claude Fable 5.1 or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

Both sit in the frontier tier, so the choice usually comes down to price and context rather than capability. Claude Fable 5.1 suits frontier agents; Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro suits open-weight frontier work.

Can I self-host Claude Fable 5.1 or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro publishes open weights, but self-hosting and third-party provider access depend on the licence, hardware, serving support, and availability. Claude Fable 5.1 is a closed model whose supported access paths are controlled by its provider.

Next step

Choosing between them

The verified figures that separate this pair, computed from the catalog rather than restated boilerplate.

Input price: Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs $0.435 per 1M tokens versus $10 for Claude Fable 5.1 — a 23x difference at the headline tier.
Context: Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro takes 1.05M against 1M for Claude Fable 5.1 — only decisive if your prompts approach the smaller window.
Measured capability: Claude Fable 5.1 leads Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 53.4 to 46.3 (measured 2026-09-26).
Deployment: Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro publishes weights you can self-host; the other is API-only.

Run the model picker Estimate stack cost All model comparisons

Choosing a harness rather than a model — Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Windsurf, or Lovable? Compare agentic harnesses · Latest releases.