Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 38× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.5 MiniMax

38.3

Rank #188 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 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 Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 26.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 100% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 4% for MiniMax-M2.5.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1 and MiniMax-M2.5 specifications
Claude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
ProviderAnthropicMiniMax
Noometry Index69.038.3
Released2026-09-012026-02-12
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M205K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$50$1.20
Results tracked5233

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 74.7 (#1), MiniMax-M2.5: 48.1 (#58)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena WebDev17441387
LMArena Coding15281381
ALE-Bench2,143618.17
FrontierCode50.9%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—75.8%
CursorBench51.8%—
SWE-bench Multilingual—68.3%
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
GSO88.2%—
WeirdML92.9%—
MirrorCode73.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), MiniMax-M2.5: 30.4 (#77)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
Vending-Bench 25,422-23.16
Terminal-Bench—42.7%
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
GDP.pdf29.6%—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), MiniMax-M2.5: 17.5 (#292)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
ARC-AGI-290%4.9%
NYT Connections (extended)90%16.8%
ARC-AGI-197.5%63.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts15261372
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7146.68
Kagi LLM Benchmark—55.2%
CritPt31.1%—
Chess Puzzles47%—
EBR-Bench57.1%—
Mystery Game Puzzles58%—
DTBench97.6%—
LMCA65.5%—

Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), MiniMax-M2.5: 26.9 (#253)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
ProofBench100%4%
LMArena Math15251378
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), MiniMax-M2.5: 39.2 (#135)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Expert15351379
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), MiniMax-M2.5: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), MiniMax-M2.5: 47.1 (#152)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Non-English15071338
LMArena Chinese15861393
LMArena French15251362
LMArena German15001362
LMArena Japanese15431171
LMArena Korean15341232
LMArena Russian15211358
LMArena Spanish15161354

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), MiniMax-M2.5: 71.5 (#148)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Instruction Following15171353

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), MiniMax-M2.5: 37.5 (#216)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Longer Query15221366
CL-bench—11.4%
CL-bench Life—6.3%

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), MiniMax-M2.5: 53.9 (#153)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Text15101359
LMArena Creative Writing15071331
EQ-Bench Creative Writing21621361
LMArena Multi-Turn14921364

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than MiniMax-M2.5?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.5 costs 38× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 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 Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or MiniMax-M2.5 better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 48.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and MiniMax-M2.5 share?

26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.5 has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper