Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs MiniMax-M2.7

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 30 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #19 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.7

Rank #196 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 9 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.7 to 25.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 54% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 3% for MiniMax-M2.7.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • Claude Opus 4.7 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
ProviderAnthropicMiniMax
Noometry Index58.337.7
Released2026-04-142026-03-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M205K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.20
Results tracked6630

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 59.6 (#13), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena WebDev15581398
SciCode54.5%47%
WeirdML76.4%37%
LMArena Coding15181454
ALE-Bench1,323599.25
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
GSO44.1%—
MirrorCode31.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#10), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench80.2%45.1%
ExploitBench26.5%13.3%
GBAEval43.8%0%
APEX-Agents49.2%—
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
PostTrainBench28.6%—
GDP.pdf21%—
LMArena Search1233—
Vending-Bench 210,937—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.8 (#29), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
NYT Connections (extended)39%24.7%
CritPt12%0.6%
Thematic Generalization72.8%39.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts15061422
Epoch Capabilities Index156.25145.85
ARC-AGI-275.8%—
SimpleBench61.7%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%—
ARC-AGI-193.5%—
Chess Puzzles30%—
EBR-Bench19%—
Mystery Game Puzzles28%—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA52.2%—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.7 (#26), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
ProofBench54%3%
LMArena Math14991420
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#23), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%12.9%
LMArena Expert15211444
GPQA Diamond90.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
SimpleQA Verified51.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.2 (#38), MiniMax-M2.7: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Vision1316—
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.3 (#10), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English14801382
LMArena Chinese15311441
LMArena French15031421
LMArena German14951398
LMArena Japanese14721262
LMArena Korean14641313
LMArena Russian14941383
LMArena Spanish14951403

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.4 (#10), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following14981405

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.2 (#25), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query15051419

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.1 (#8), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text14901405
LMArena Creative Writing14861354
LMArena Multi-Turn15051412
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1914—
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than MiniMax-M2.7?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or MiniMax-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.6 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.7 does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and MiniMax-M2.7 share?

30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper