Model comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs MiniMax-M2.5

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 38× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5 Anthropic

66.8

Rank #5 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.5 MiniMax

38.3

Rank #188 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 9 categories and MiniMax-M2.5 in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5 leads 88.5 to 26.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 95% for Claude Fable 5 and 4% for MiniMax-M2.5.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.
  • Claude Fable 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5 and MiniMax-M2.5 specifications
Claude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
ProviderAnthropicMiniMax
Noometry Index66.838.3
Released2026-06-072026-02-12
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M205K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$50$1.20
Results tracked6233

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 70.6 (#4), MiniMax-M2.5: 48.1 (#58)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena WebDev16251387
LMArena Coding15191381
ALE-Bench2,041618.17
DeepSWE69.9%—
FrontierCode53.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—75.8%
SWE-bench Multilingual—68.3%
FrontierSWE47%—
SciCode61%—
GSO78.4%—
WeirdML91.9%—
MirrorCode63.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 54.0 (#2), MiniMax-M2.5: 30.4 (#77)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
Vending-Bench 25,680-23.16
Terminal-Bench—42.7%
APEX-Agents63.6%—
Remote Labor Index16.1%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
PostTrainBench41.8%—
GBAEval74.5%—
GDP.pdf30%—
LMArena Search1230—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#6), MiniMax-M2.5: 17.5 (#292)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
ARC-AGI-289.2%4.9%
Kagi LLM Benchmark91.4%55.2%
NYT Connections (extended)92.7%16.8%
ARC-AGI-198.5%63.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts15081372
Epoch Capabilities Index162.06146.68
SimpleBench81.9%—
CritPt28.6%—
Chess Puzzles41%—
EnigmaEval39.3%—
EBR-Bench39.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles52%—
DTBench98.4%—
LMCA61.1%—
Surface Evolver Bench95%—
Bench to the Future 30.13—

Math Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 88.5 (#5), MiniMax-M2.5: 26.9 (#253)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
ProofBench95%4%
LMArena Math15191378
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)87%—
FrontierMath Tier 490.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 62.2 (#25), MiniMax-M2.5: 39.2 (#135)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Expert15341379
GPQA Diamond85.9%—
SimpleQA Verified70.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 45.3 (#17), MiniMax-M2.5: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Vision1324—
Blueprint-Bench 238.6%—
Furniture Assembly35.8%—
LMArena Document1496—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 57.3 (#9), MiniMax-M2.5: 47.1 (#152)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Non-English14811338
LMArena Chinese15431393
LMArena French15051362
LMArena German14861362
LMArena Japanese15061171
LMArena Korean14881232
LMArena Russian15041358
LMArena Spanish14981354

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 78.6 (#8), MiniMax-M2.5: 71.5 (#148)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Instruction Following15021353

Long Context Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#23), MiniMax-M2.5: 37.5 (#216)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Longer Query15091366
CL-bench—11.4%
CL-bench Life—6.3%

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 75.9 (#5), MiniMax-M2.5: 53.9 (#153)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Text14911359
LMArena Creative Writing14941331
EQ-Bench Creative Writing19431361
LMArena Multi-Turn15041364
EQ-Bench 41340—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5 better than MiniMax-M2.5?

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 38× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or MiniMax-M2.5?

MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5 or MiniMax-M2.5 better for coding?

Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.6 versus 48.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5 does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and MiniMax-M2.5 share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 62 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.5 has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper