Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiMo V2.5
Select two models to compare their coding performance, pricing, and features.
Key Takeaways
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 | MiMo V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Coding Index | 107.83 | 83.98 |
| Coding tier | A+ | B- |
| Input Price | $5/1M | $0.14/1M |
| Output Price | $25/1M | $0.28/1M |
| Context Window | 1M | 1.05M |
Coding Index
Coding Index · Reference baseline: 100
Integer index difference: 23.85
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 = 100. The index reflects two shared tests, not capability multiples or statistically established gaps.
Verdict
The models have different editorial tier assessments. The index is supplementary and cannot predict performance on every development task.
Capabilities & Use Cases Comparison
Claude Opus 4.8 Tier A+
- •Complex architecture
- •Multi-file refactoring
- •Code review
- •Claude Code
- •Best-in-class code reasoning and architecture design
- •Excels at complex multi-file refactoring
- •Superior at understanding large codebases
- •Strong at following nuanced instructions
MiMo V2.5 Tier B-
Claude Opus 4.8
Benchmark evidence and ranking method · Claude Opus 4.8
Cross-checked
Terminal-Bench 4.0 · Claude Code · max: 23.64% · 95% CI ± 3.56%
Artificial Analysis · Claude Opus 4.8 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort)
Test configuration: max
Terminal-Bench 2.1: 84.64% · SciCode: 54.40%
LiveBench · 2026-06-25 · claude-opus-4-8-max-effort
Coding: 81.83% · Agentic Coding: 50.50%
ModelRank assigns editorial tiers using public coding evidence, not automatic index thresholds or statistically proven classes. Price, speed, context size and sponsorship do not affect tiers.
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 = 100. The index reflects two shared tests, not capability multiples or statistically established gaps.
Results reflect particular model configurations. Agent harnesses, reasoning effort, tools, budgets and tasks may differ. Close indices do not establish superiority. B describes a relative position in this selected group, not an inability to code.
Data checked: 2026-09-10. Snapshot date is the retrieval date, not necessarily the evaluation date.
MiMo V2.5
Benchmark evidence and ranking method · MiMo V2.5
Single-source measurements
Artificial Analysis · MiMo-V2.5
Test configuration: unspecified
Terminal-Bench 2.1: 63.67% · SciCode: 43.87%
ModelRank assigns editorial tiers using public coding evidence, not automatic index thresholds or statistically proven classes. Price, speed, context size and sponsorship do not affect tiers.
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 = 100. The index reflects two shared tests, not capability multiples or statistically established gaps.
Results reflect particular model configurations. Agent harnesses, reasoning effort, tools, budgets and tasks may differ. Close indices do not establish superiority. B describes a relative position in this selected group, not an inability to code.
Data checked: 2026-09-10. Snapshot date is the retrieval date, not necessarily the evaluation date.
Results reflect particular model configurations. Agent harnesses, reasoning effort, tools, budgets and tasks may differ. Close indices do not establish superiority. B describes a relative position in this selected group, not an inability to code.
API cost estimate
1M input + 200K output (USD):
Claude Opus 4.8: $10.0000
MiMo V2.5: $0.1960
Estimates use the displayed channel and time band; DeepSeek uses peak rates. Cache discounts, tool fees, long-context price tiers and uncounted additional tokens are excluded.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which model is better for coding: Claude Opus 4.8 or MiMo V2.5?
Claude Opus 4.8 has a higher reference index on the selected shared benchmark configuration than MiMo V2.5 (107.83 vs 83.98, a 23.85-point difference). This does not by itself establish general coding superiority. Editorial tiers: Claude Opus 4.8 = A+; MiMo V2.5 = B-. Tiers are separate editorial assessments and do not establish a reliable order within a tier.
How do Claude Opus 4.8 and MiMo V2.5 compare in API pricing and costs?
Claude Opus 4.8: $5/1M input, $25/1M output (OpenRouter quote); MiMo V2.5: $0.14/1M input, $0.28/1M output (OpenRouter quote). 1M input + 200K output (USD): $10.0000 vs $0.1960.
What are the context window sizes of Claude Opus 4.8 and MiMo V2.5?
Claude Opus 4.8 provides a 1,000,000 token context window, while MiMo V2.5 provides 1,050,000 tokens.