Claude Haiku 4.5 vs MiMo-V2-Flash

Pick MiMo-V2-Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Haiku 4.5 only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

MiMo-V2-Flash has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 62 versus 59. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

MiMo-V2-Flash's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 73.4 against 73.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 73.4%.

Claude Haiku 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.00 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for MiMo-V2-Flash. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. MiMo-V2-Flash is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Haiku 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. MiMo-V2-Flash gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for Claude Haiku 4.5.