Claude Fable 5.1 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic |  MiMo V2.6 ProXiaomi |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #1 of 4699.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #43 of 44$0.824 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #22 of 3851.7 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $10.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.435Openrouter ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $50.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.87Openrouter ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 1,049K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 2, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 22, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Fable 5.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Family | Claude 5 1 | Mimo V2 6 |
| Model | Claude Fable 5.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Version | Claude Fable 5.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2026-09-21 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-06-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video, Audio |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 1,049K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 1T |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 42B |
| License | Unknown | MIT |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard) | Openrouter (Standard), Xiaomi MiMo (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Claude Fable 5.1 Capabilities
MiMo V2.6 Pro Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Fable 5Anthropic | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Fable 5.1 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro FAQs
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Fable 5.1 and MiMo V2.6 Pro, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro?+
Claude Fable 5.1 is $10.00 and MiMo V2.6 Pro is $0.435 per million tokens, so MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper on this metric. Claude Fable 5.1 is $50.00 and MiMo V2.6 Pro is $0.87 per million tokens, so MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro?+
MiMo V2.6 Pro has the larger sourced context window. Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1,000K and MiMo V2.6 Pro supports 1,049K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro be self-hosted?+
MiMo V2.6 Pro is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Fable 5.1 is not marked open weight; MiMo V2.6 Pro is open weight.
Can Claude Fable 5.1 and MiMo V2.6 Pro understand images?+
Claude Fable 5.1 is documented with image input; MiMo V2.6 Pro is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro?+
MiMo V2.6 Pro has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Fable 5.1 supports 128K and MiMo V2.6 Pro supports 131K output tokens.
Do Claude Fable 5.1 and MiMo V2.6 Pro support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Fable 5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. MiMo V2.6 Pro: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro?+
Claude Fable 5.1 has 1 sourced provider route; MiMo V2.6 Pro has 2, so MiMo V2.6 Pro has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Fable 5.1 or MiMo V2.6 Pro?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.