Model comparison
GPT-5.5 Pro vs MiniMax-M2
GPT-5.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.3 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2 costs 129× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.5 Pro leads 73.3 to 19.4.
- MiniMax-M2 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $30 / $180 for GPT-5.5 Pro.
- GPT-5.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
- MiniMax-M2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 64.3 | 37.4 |
| Released | 2026-04-23 | 2025-10-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 205K |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $30 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $180 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, MiniMax-M2: 39.3 (#159)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 61% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1370 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, MiniMax-M2: 25.1 (#109)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 30% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 160.6 |
Reasoning GPT-5.5 Pro leads
GPT-5.5 Pro: 73.3 (#10), MiniMax-M2: 19.4 (#258)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 84.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 76.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 57.8% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 14.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 96.5% | — |
| CritPt | 30.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 64% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1357 |
| DTBench | 96% | — |
| LMCA | 53.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.07 | — |
Math GPT-5.5 Pro leads
GPT-5.5 Pro: 84.0 (#10), MiniMax-M2: 37.3 (#160)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 87.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 78% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1352 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 52.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 39.6% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.5 Pro leads
GPT-5.5 Pro: 64.1 (#19), MiniMax-M2: 37.0 (#163)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1337 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, MiniMax-M2: 45.3 (#171)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1366 |
| LMArena French | — | 1335 |
| LMArena German | — | 1355 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1331 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1326 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, MiniMax-M2: 70.2 (#166)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1328 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#153)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1331 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.5 Pro: —, MiniMax-M2: 53.0 (#162)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.5 Pro | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1286 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1361 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.5 Pro better than MiniMax-M2?
GPT-5.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.3 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2 costs 129× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.5 Pro or MiniMax-M2?
MiniMax-M2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.5 Pro lists at $30 and $180.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.5 Pro and MiniMax-M2 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.5 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2 has 21.