Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs MiniMax M2.5
Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiniMax M2.5 are closely matched at 37.2 and 36.9 on the LLM Stats Score. MiniMax M2.5 is 11.4x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · MiniMax · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiniMax M2.5 are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 37.2 and 36.9.
In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, MiniMax M2.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, MiniMax M2.5 is roughly 11.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
MiniMax M2.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026
Choose MiniMax M2.5
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 11.4x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Individual benchmarks
17 reported for Claude Sonnet 4.6 · 8 for MiniMax M2.5
Claude Sonnet 4.6 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while MiniMax M2.5 is better at 2 benchmarks (BrowseComp, SWE-Bench Verified).
MiniMax M2.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than MiniMax M2.5 ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 12.5x more expensive than MiniMax M2.5 ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 4.6 is more expensive than MiniMax M2.5.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
MiniMax M2.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Claude Sonnet 4.6's 200,000 tokens. MiniMax M2.5 can generate longer responses up to 1,000,000 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 is limited to 64,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniMax M2.5 does not.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Claude Sonnet 4.6
MiniMax M2.5
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while MiniMax M2.5 uses MIT.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude Sonnet 4.6 was released on 2026-02-17, while MiniMax M2.5 was released on 2026-02-12.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is 0 month newer than MiniMax M2.5.
Feb 17, 2026
6 months ago
5d newerFeb 12, 2026
6 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is available from Anthropic. MiniMax M2.5 is available from MiniMax.
Claude Sonnet 4.6
MiniMax M2.5
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 4.6 and MiniMax M2.5 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs MiniMax M2.5.