Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
MiniMax M2.7 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 57 to 51. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiniMax M2.7's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 57 against 43.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 43.3% to 57%. Claude 4.1 Opus does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Pick MiniMax M2.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4.1 Opus only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Claude 4.1 Opus
43.3
MiniMax M2.7
57
Claude 4.1 Opus
74.5
MiniMax M2.7
56.2
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.
MiniMax M2.7 is ahead overall, 57 to 51. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 43.3% and 57%.
Claude 4.1 Opus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 56.2. MiniMax M2.7 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
MiniMax M2.7 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 57 versus 43.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.