← All Comparisons

MiniMax M2.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6

A detailed comparison of MiniMax M2.5 (MiniMax) and Claude Opus 4.6 (Anthropic) across pricing, performance, and features.

Pricing Comparison

MetricMiniMax M2.5Claude Opus 4.6Difference
Input / 1M tokens$0.30$5.00+1567%
Output / 1M tokens$1.20$25.00+1983%
Context window200K200K
Max output128K32K

Benchmark Comparison

BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Claude Opus 4.6
MMLU-Pro82%89.5%
HumanEval90%95%
GPQA75.5%

Capabilities

CapabilityMiniMax M2.5Claude Opus 4.6
code
reasoning
text
tool-use
vision

MiniMax M2.5 Strengths

  • Frontier quality at budget pricing ($0.30/$1.20)
  • 80.2% SWE-Bench Verified — among the best
  • Open-source (MIT) with 10B active params — easy to run

MiniMax M2.5 Weaknesses

  • Text-only — no vision or audio
  • No tool-use support
  • Newer provider — smaller ecosystem

Claude Opus 4.6 Strengths

  • Best-in-class agentic tool use and coding
  • 1M context available in beta (Tier 4)
  • Strong at following complex multi-step instructions

Claude Opus 4.6 Weaknesses

  • Premium pricing ($10/$37.50 at 1M context)
  • 1M context beta is Tier 4 only

Quick Verdict

Best value: MiniMax M2.5 is the more affordable option at $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens.

Higher benchmarks: Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on average across available benchmarks (86.7% avg).

Choose MiniMax M2.5 if cost matters most. Choose Claude Opus 4.6 if you need the best possible quality for complex tasks.

More Comparisons