Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs MiniMax-M2

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2 costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2 MiniMax

37.4

Rank #204 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 9 categories and MiniMax-M2 in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 42.6 to 19.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 52.5% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 14.8% for MiniMax-M2.
  • MiniMax-M2 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • MiniMax-M2 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 200K.
  • MiniMax-M2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5 and MiniMax-M2 specifications
Claude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
ProviderAnthropicMiniMax
Noometry Index50.537.4
Released2025-11-012025-10-27
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K205K
Max output64K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.20
Results tracked6921

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), MiniMax-M2: 39.3 (#159)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%61%
LMArena WebDev14941297
LMArena Coding15041370
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
GSO26.5%—
WeirdML63.7%—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), MiniMax-M2: 25.1 (#109)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
Terminal-Bench63.1%30%
Vending-Bench 24,967160.6
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), MiniMax-M2: 19.4 (#258)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%57.8%
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%14.8%
LMArena Hard Prompts14761357
ARC-AGI-237.6%—
SimpleBench62%—
ARC-AGI-180%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA44.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), MiniMax-M2: 37.3 (#160)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
LMArena Math14631352
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%—
ProofBench36%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), MiniMax-M2: 37.0 (#163)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
LMArena Expert14871337
GPQA Diamond86%—
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
SimpleQA Verified45.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), MiniMax-M2: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), MiniMax-M2: 45.3 (#171)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
LMArena Non-English14381313
LMArena Chinese14701366
LMArena French14711335
LMArena German14491355
LMArena Russian14471331
LMArena Spanish14581326
LMArena Japanese1416—
LMArena Korean1424—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), MiniMax-M2: 70.2 (#166)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
LMArena Instruction Following14781328

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#153)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
LMArena Longer Query14801331
CL-bench21.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), MiniMax-M2: 53.0 (#162)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5MiniMax-M2
LMArena Text14511340
LMArena Creative Writing14451286
LMArena Multi-Turn14661361
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than MiniMax-M2?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2 costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or MiniMax-M2?

MiniMax-M2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or MiniMax-M2 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 39.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2 does, with 205K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and MiniMax-M2 share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2 has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper