# 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.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-7-vs-minimax-m2-7
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 30

## 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.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 58.3 | 37.7 |
| Rank | 19 | 196 |
| Context | 1M | 205K |
| Input $/M | $5 | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | $25 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | 1398 |
| SciCode | 54.5% | 47% |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | 37% |
| LMArena Coding | 1518 | 1454 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,323 | 599.25 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 83.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | — |
| GSO | 44.1% | — |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | 45.1% |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | 13.3% |
| GBAEval | 43.8% | 0% |
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 40.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 21% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1233 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,937 | — |

## Reasoning

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 39% | 24.7% |
| CritPt | 12% | 0.6% |
| Thematic Generalization | 72.8% | 39.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1506 | 1422 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.25 | 145.85 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 93.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 19% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 28% | — |
| DTBench | 94.7% | — |
| LMCA | 52.2% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |

## Math

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 54% | 3% |
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1420 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 70.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 73.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 43.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 22.9% | — |

## Knowledge

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | 12.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | 1444 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 36.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | — |

## Multimodal

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1316 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 24.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | — |

## Multilingual

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1480 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1531 | 1441 |
| LMArena French | 1503 | 1421 |
| LMArena German | 1495 | 1398 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1472 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1464 | 1313 |
| LMArena Russian | 1494 | 1383 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1495 | 1403 |

## Instruction Following

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1498 | 1405 |

## Long Context

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1505 | 1419 |

## Writing & Preference

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

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1490 | 1405 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1486 | 1354 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1505 | 1412 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1914 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | — |

## FAQ

### 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.