Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 57× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and MiniMax-M2.5 in 2 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 31.6 to 17.6.
- MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- MiniMax-M2.5 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 200K.
- MiniMax-M2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 2026-02-12 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 205K |
| Max output | 32K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 48 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69), MiniMax-M2.5: 47.9 (#53)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | 1386 |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1380 |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | 618.17 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 75.8% |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 68.3% |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), MiniMax-M2.5: 30.2 (#70)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | 42.7% |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | -23.16 |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70), MiniMax-M2.5: 17.6 (#281)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1372 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | 146.68 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 55.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 63.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 37.1% | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
Math MiniMax-M2.5 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), MiniMax-M2.5: 25.8 (#242)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1378 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93), MiniMax-M2.5: 38.6 (#132)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | 9.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1378 |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), MiniMax-M2.5: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), MiniMax-M2.5: 47.3 (#147)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1338 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1392 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1363 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1361 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1169 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1232 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1359 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1354 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), MiniMax-M2.5: 71.7 (#143)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1353 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), MiniMax-M2.5: 37.4 (#211)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1367 |
| CL-bench | — | 11.4% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 6.3% |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), MiniMax-M2.5: 54.1 (#149)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1359 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1331 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1361 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than MiniMax-M2.5?
Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 57× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 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 Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4.1 or MiniMax-M2.5 better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.9 versus 44.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax-M2.5 does, with 205K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and MiniMax-M2.5 share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.5 has 33.