Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs MiniMax-M2.7

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 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 . 25 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.7

Rank #196 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 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 Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 25.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 100% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 3% for MiniMax-M2.7.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 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-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
ProviderAnthropicMiniMax
Noometry Index69.037.7
Released2026-09-012026-03-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M205K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$50$1.20
Results tracked5230

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-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena WebDev17441398
SciCode63.1%47%
WeirdML92.9%37%
LMArena Coding15281454
ALE-Bench2,143599.25
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
GSO88.2%—
MirrorCode73.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench—45.1%
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
ExploitBench—13.3%
GBAEval—0%
GDP.pdf29.6%—
Vending-Bench 25,422—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
NYT Connections (extended)90%24.7%
CritPt31.1%0.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts15261422
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7145.85
ARC-AGI-290%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
Chess Puzzles47%—
Thematic Generalization—39.3%
EBR-Bench57.1%—
Mystery Game Puzzles58%—
DTBench97.6%—
LMCA65.5%—

Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
ProofBench100%3%
LMArena Math15251420
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-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Expert15351444
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), MiniMax-M2.7: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English15071382
LMArena Chinese15861441
LMArena French15251421
LMArena German15001398
LMArena Japanese15431262
LMArena Korean15341313
LMArena Russian15211383
LMArena Spanish15161403

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following15171405

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query15221419

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text15101405
LMArena Creative Writing15071354
LMArena Multi-Turn14921412
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than MiniMax-M2.7?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 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-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 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-M2.7 better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 41.8 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-M2.7 share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper