Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking vs MiniMax M3

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

57.37/100
Margin
12.4pts
winning →
MiniMax
69.8/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking unranked; MiniMax M3 #18

BenchAlign evidence: Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking estimated; MiniMax M3 supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and MiniMax M3 share 14 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking; 31 to MiniMax M3.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
14
Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking only
3
MiniMax M3 only
31
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and MiniMax M3 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

MiniMax M3 has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and MiniMax M3
CategoryClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingΔMiniMax M3
AgenticClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiniMax M372.3
CodingClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiniMax M372.2
MathClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiniMax M385.7
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapMiniMax M364.9

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableMiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableMiniMax M3Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot availableMiniMax M3Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.5 Thinking200KMiniMax M31MMiniMax M3 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 89.5%88.9%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 83.5%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 70.1%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 74.2%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 74.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 35.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 44.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1395Not comparable
GDPval rubricsSource 74.7%Not comparable
BankerToolBenchSource 76.1%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 19.8%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 4.6%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1110Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 32.1%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 6.7%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
Vibe Code BenchSource 20.63%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 47.0%42.4%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-SciCodeSource 49.5%45.4%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 59%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66.0%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 42.1%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 58.6%Not comparable
VIBE V2Source 50.1%Not comparable
SVG-BenchSource 63.7%Not comparable
KernelBench HardSource 28.8%Not comparable
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source 65.2%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
AA-LCRSource 74.0%74.0%Tie
CritPtSource 4.6%3.7%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 40.8%44.4%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 86.6%92.9%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-HLESource 28.4%37.1%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 13.3%1.4%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 45.7%15.0%Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 59.8%16.1%MiniMax M3 leads
AA MMLU-ProSource 89.5%Not comparable
AA Openness IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
USAMO 2026Source 85.7%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource 91.3%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 74.0%78.6%MiniMax M3 leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12811294MiniMax M3 leads
OfficeQA ProSource 45.1%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source 91.6%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 78.1%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 84.6%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source 85.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5 ThinkingMiniMax M3Result
AA-IFBenchSource 58.0%82.9%MiniMax M3 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and MiniMax M3 on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and MiniMax M3 today?

MiniMax M3: $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 16, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.