Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs MiniMax M2
Wins 4 of 6 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Agents · Following instructions
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger all-rounder.MiniMax M2 is cheaper and better at agents.
Scores updated · 44 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software50Claude Sonnet 4.55 of 5 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20Claude Sonnet 4.52 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Sonnet 4.52 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Sonnet 4.51 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own02MiniMax M22 of 2 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01MiniMax M21 of 1 test
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
MiniMax M2 costs 92% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Sonnet 4.5 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+41.8points ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues in many programming languagesSWE-bench Multilingual+10.5points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+9.8points ahead
Where MiniMax M2 pulls ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+19.9points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+15points ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+6.1points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 44 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.5
- SWE-bench MultilingualClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 10.56756.5+10.5
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 9.835.625.8+9.8
- LMArena · WebDevClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 97 rating points13941297+97 rating
- SciCodeClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 9.645.736.1+9.6
- SWE-bench VerifiedClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 7.877.269.4+7.8
AgentsMiniMax M2
- BrowseCompMiniMax M2 by 19.924.144+19.9
- GDPValMiniMax M2 by 6.120.526.6+6.1
ReasoningClaude Sonnet 4.5
- GPQA DiamondClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 5.783.477.7+5.7
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 4.117.813.7+4.1
- CritPttie1.10.9tie
FactsClaude Sonnet 4.5
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 41.850.99.1+41.8
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 9.732.923.2+9.7
Following instructionsMiniMax M2
- IFBenchMiniMax M2 by 1557.372.3+15
Other results30 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 46.4-0.1-46.5+46.4
- VIBE-iOSClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 41.781.239.5+41.7
- SWT-benchClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 36.769.532.8+36.7
- BrowseComp (context management)MiniMax M2 by 30.826.156.9+30.8
- AA Agentic IndexMiniMax M2 by 3017.547.5+30
- ToolathlonClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 24.34116.7+24.3
- VIBE-BackendClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 2390.867.8+23
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 22.952.129.2+22.9
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Claude Sonnet 4.5 by 205030+20
- VIBE-AndroidClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 18.387.569.2+18.3
- VIBE (Average)Claude Sonnet 4.5 by 17.785.267.5+17.7
- LiveCodeBenchMiniMax M2 by 127183+12
- τ²-BenchClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 119887+11
- OctoCodingbenchClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 9.522.813.3+9.5
- AIME 2025Claude Sonnet 4.5 by 98778+9
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)MiniMax M2 by 8.778.186.8+8.7
- Multi-SWE-BenchClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 8.144.336.2+8.1
- VIBE-WebClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 6.987.380.4+6.9
- BrowseComp-ZHMiniMax M2 by 6.142.448.5+6.1
- xbench-DeepSearchMiniMax M2 by 66672+6
- MMLU-ProClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 5.587.582+5.5
- ArtifactsBenchMiniMax M2 by 5.361.566.8+5.3
- theagentcompanyClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 54136+5
- FinSearchComp-globalMiniMax M2 by 4.760.865.5+4.7
- GAIA (text only)MiniMax M2 by 4.571.275.7+4.5
- Terminal-BenchClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 3.75046.3+3.7
- AA IntelligenceClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 2.120.718.6+2.1
- VIBE-SimulationClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 2.179.177+2.1
- SWE-PerfClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 1.631.4+1.6
- HLE (with tools)tie3231.8tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or MiniMax M2?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins four of the six areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, facts and long documents. MiniMax M2 wins agents and following instructions, and costs 92% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4.5. It wins 5 of the 5 coding tests both models report; MiniMax M2 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2 costs $0.30 and $1.20. That makes MiniMax M2 about 92% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 44 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 14 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 30 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.