Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs MiniMax-M2.7
MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 2 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 7 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 37.7 to 28.6.
- MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 34.6 | 37.7 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2026-03-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 30 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.0 (#165), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 40% | 37% |
| LMArena Coding | 1342 | 1454 |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1398 |
| SciCode | — | 47% |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 599.25 |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 45.1% |
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | — | 13.3% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1422 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | 145.85 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 24.7% |
| CritPt | — | 0.6% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 39.3% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| DTBench | 67.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
Math MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1307 | 1420 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1265 | 1444 |
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| MMLU | 87.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120), MiniMax-M2.7: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | 1441 |
| LMArena French | 1305 | 1421 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1398 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | 1313 |
| LMArena Russian | 1306 | 1383 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | 1403 |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1405 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1419 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1405 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1354 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1412 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than MiniMax-M2.7?
MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiniMax-M2.7 share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.