Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) vs MiMo-V2-Omni

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

66.27/100
Margin
3.1pts
← winning
63.15/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) #27 (Estimated); MiMo-V2-Omni #40 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) and MiMo-V2-Omni share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 25 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive); 1 to MiMo-V2-Omni.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
13
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) only
25
MiMo-V2-Omni only
1
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Omni only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 66.27 to 63.15. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)'s sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 78.6 against 74.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 87.6% to 74.8%.

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for MiMo-V2-Omni.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) and MiMo-V2-Omni
CategoryClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)ΔMiMo-V2-Omni
CodingClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)78.6Margin← 3.8MiMo-V2-Omni74.8
AgenticClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.1MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)75.8MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)60.0MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)65.1MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-OmniNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)B · MiMo-V2-Omni

  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 87.6%B 74.8%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Δ 12.8
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) scored 87.6%; MiMo-V2-Omni scored 74.8%. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)$5 input / $25 outputMiMo-V2-OmniNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not availableMiMo-V2-OmniNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)Not availableMiMo-V2-OmniNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)1MMiMo-V2-Omni262KClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 69.4%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 79.3%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 77.3%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 78%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource 73.1%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 44.4%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 88.6%91.2%MiMo-V2-Omni leads
GDPval-AASource 49.8%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1495—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 18.2%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 45.9%—Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 46.7%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —45.2%Not comparable
CodingClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 87.6%74.8%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
SWE-bench ProSource 64.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 69.4%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 73.6%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 54.5%36.7%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniResult
MRCR v2 128K-256KSource 59.2%—Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 75.8%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 70.3%66.7%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
CritPtSource 12.0%1.1%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniResult
GPQASource 94.2%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 94.2%—Not comparable
HLESource 54.7%—Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 46.9%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 53.5%35.0%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 91.4%82.8%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-HLESource 39.6%19.9%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 26.2%-17.4%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 45.8%18.7%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 36.2%44.4%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniResult
FrontierMath (legacy)Source 43.8%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniResult
OfficeQA ProSource 43.6%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 91%—Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 82.1%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.8%69.9%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1325—Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)MiMo-V2-OmniResult
AA-IFBenchSource 58.6%53.5%Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or MiMo-V2-Omni?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 66.27 to 63.15. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 87.6% and 74.8%.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) or MiMo-V2-Omni?

Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 78.6 versus 74.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.