The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs MiniCPM-SALA

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.0 to 14.4.

Anthropic · OpenBMB · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 58.0 to 14.4, ranking #3 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 58.0 and ranks #3 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose MiniCPM-SALA

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic
MiniCPM-SALA
OpenBMB
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
58.0
#3
14.4
#244
Reasoning
56.6
#3
15.7
#229
Coding
48.8
#2
21.0
#98
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$2.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$10.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 5.5
MiniCPM-SALA
Math
36.9#34
14.2#222
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

47 reported for Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 24 for MiniCPM-SALA

No common benchmarks found

Claude Sonnet 5.5 and MiniCPM-SALAdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Sonnet 5.5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Sonnet 5.5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Oct 06 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniCPM-SALA does not.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiniCPM-SALA

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while MiniCPM-SALA uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

MiniCPM-SALA

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 5.5 was released on 2026-09-28, while MiniCPM-SALA was released on 2026-02-11.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 8 months newer than MiniCPM-SALA.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Sep 28, 2026

1 weeks ago

7mo newer
MiniCPM-SALA

Feb 11, 2026

7 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while MiniCPM-SALA's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Sonnet 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiniCPM-SALA's cutoff date.

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Jun 2026

MiniCPM-SALA

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 5.5 and MiniCPM-SALA side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 5.5
✓ Preferred
MiniCPM-SALA
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs MiniCPM-SALA.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or MiniCPM-SALA?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.0 to 14.4. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is made by Anthropic and MiniCPM-SALA is made by OpenBMB. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Sonnet 5.5 compare to MiniCPM-SALA in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores BenchCAD (with Python tool): 96.3%, ArXivMath (with tools): 95.2%, Global-MMLU: 92.1%, MILU: 91.6%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 90.3%. MiniCPM-SALA scores HumanEval: 95.1%, RULER 64k: 92.7%, RULER 128k: 89.4%, MBPP: 89.1%, RULER 512K: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and MiniCPM-SALA?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and MiniCPM-SALA supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 5.5 and MiniCPM-SALA?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (58.0 vs 14.4), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 5.5 and MiniCPM-SALA?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and MiniCPM-SALA is developed by OpenBMB.

Related comparisons