Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs MiniMax-M2.5

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.5 MiniMax

38.3

Rank #188 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 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 Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 26.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 91.1% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 16.8% for MiniMax-M2.5.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
ProviderAnthropicMiniMax
Noometry Index60.738.3
Released2026-05-282026-02-12
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M205K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.20
Results tracked6533

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), MiniMax-M2.5: 48.1 (#58)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena WebDev15561387
LMArena Coding14901381
ALE-Bench1,564618.17
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—75.8%
SWE-bench Multilingual—68.3%
SciCode53.5%—
GSO47.1%—
WeirdML82.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), MiniMax-M2.5: 30.4 (#77)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
Vending-Bench 25,787-23.16
Terminal-Bench—42.7%
APEX-Agents48.9%—
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
LMArena Search1204—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), MiniMax-M2.5: 17.5 (#292)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
ARC-AGI-272.1%4.9%
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%55.2%
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%16.8%
ARC-AGI-192.5%63.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts14821372
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21146.68
SimpleBench64.8%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles34%—
EnigmaEval23.5%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
DTBench94.9%—
LMCA57.5%—
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
ForecastBench59.9—

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), MiniMax-M2.5: 26.9 (#253)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
ProofBench69%4%
LMArena Math14871378
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%—
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), MiniMax-M2.5: 39.2 (#135)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Expert15021379
GPQA Diamond91%—
SimpleQA Verified53%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), MiniMax-M2.5: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Vision1294—
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), MiniMax-M2.5: 47.1 (#152)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Non-English14501338
LMArena Chinese15071393
LMArena French14811362
LMArena German14721362
LMArena Japanese14401171
LMArena Korean14321232
LMArena Russian14741358
LMArena Spanish14661354

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), MiniMax-M2.5: 71.5 (#148)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Instruction Following14761353

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), MiniMax-M2.5: 37.5 (#216)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Longer Query14831366
CL-bench—11.4%
CL-bench Life—6.3%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), MiniMax-M2.5: 53.9 (#153)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Text14611359
LMArena Creative Writing14541331
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18401361
LMArena Multi-Turn14761364
EQ-Bench 41281—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than MiniMax-M2.5?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or MiniMax-M2.5 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 48.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and MiniMax-M2.5 share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.5 has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper