Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 Anthropic

44.1

Rank #81 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.7

Rank #196 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 9 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 38.3 to 25.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 19% for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and 3% for MiniMax-M2.7.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 200K.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
ProviderAnthropicMiniMax
Noometry Index44.137.7
Released2025-09-292026-03-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K205K
Max output64K131K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$15$1.20
Results tracked7330

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.3 (#61), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena WebDev13931398
SciCode44.7%47%
WeirdML47.7%37%
LMArena Coding14891454
ALE-Bench796.15599.25
SWE-bench Verified71.3%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)71.4%—
SWE-bench Multilingual67%—
GSO14.7%—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.3 (#32), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench46.5%45.1%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard73.2%—
GDPval42.5%—
Remote Labor Index2.1%—
τ²-bench Airline72%—
τ²-bench Banking25.3%—
τ²-bench Retail72.4%—
τ²-bench Telecom84.9%—
Cybench60%—
DeepResearch Bench52.6%—
OSWorld62.9%—
ExploitBench—13.3%
GBAEval—0%
LMArena Search1159—
METR Time Horizons67.4%—
Vending-Bench 23,839—

Reasoning Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#125), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
NYT Connections (extended)37.3%24.7%
CritPt1.1%0.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14621422
Epoch Capabilities Index146.84145.85
ARC-AGI-213.6%—
SimpleBench54.3%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval6%—
Thematic Generalization—39.3%
EBR-Bench2.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles17%—
DTBench83.2%—
LMCA38.8%—
ForecastBench61.9—

Math Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 32.3 (#216), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
ProofBench19%3%
LMArena Math14491420
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)23.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%—
Omni-MATH55.3%—
MATH Level 597.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)15.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#76), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%12.9%
LMArena Expert14821444
GPQA Diamond82.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam13.7%—
SimpleQA Verified30.7%—
MMLU-Pro86.9%—
GPQA (HELM)68.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.8 (#89), MiniMax-M2.7: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
VPCT39.8%—
LMArena Document1450—

Multilingual Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.4 (#69), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English14251382
LMArena Chinese14591441
LMArena French14581421
LMArena German14271398
LMArena Japanese13901262
LMArena Korean14031313
LMArena Russian14371383
LMArena Spanish14571403

Instruction Following Too close to call

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.0 (#78), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following14591405
IFEval85%—

Long Context Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#46), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query14761419

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.5 (#34), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text14391405
LMArena Creative Writing14421354
LMArena Multi-Turn14651412
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1678—
WildBench85.4%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than MiniMax-M2.7?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 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 Sonnet 4.5 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.3 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.7 does, with 205K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and MiniMax-M2.7 share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper