LongCat-2.5 vs MAI-Code-1.1-Flash
LongCat-2.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 27.6. MAI-Code-1.1-Flash is 1.2x cheaper per token.
Meituan · Microsoft · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
LongCat-2.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 27.6, ranking #20 overall.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, LongCat-2.5 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, MAI-Code-1.1-Flash is roughly 1.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
LongCat-2.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 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 LongCat-2.5
- overall performance matters — it scores 50.0 and ranks #20 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
Choose MAI-Code-1.1-Flash
- cost matters — it's about 1.2x cheaper per token
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Individual benchmarks
23 reported for LongCat-2.5 · 2 for MAI-Code-1.1-Flash
LongCat-2.5 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Terminal-Bench 2.1), while MAI-Code-1.1-Flash is better at 0 benchmarks.
LongCat-2.5 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, LongCat-2.5 ($0.30/1M tokens) is 1.5x more expensive than MAI-Code-1.1-Flash ($0.20/1M tokens).
For output processing, LongCat-2.5 ($1.20/1M tokens) costs the same as MAI-Code-1.1-Flash ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, LongCat-2.5 is more expensive than MAI-Code-1.1-Flash.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
LongCat-2.5 has 1462.0B more parameters than MAI-Code-1.1-Flash, making it 1059.4% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
LongCat-2.5 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to MAI-Code-1.1-Flash's 256,000 tokens. Only LongCat-2.5 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both LongCat-2.5 and MAI-Code-1.1-Flash support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
LongCat-2.5
MAI-Code-1.1-Flash
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
LongCat-2.5 was released on 2026-11-01, while MAI-Code-1.1-Flash was released on 2026-08-11.
LongCat-2.5 is 3 months newer than MAI-Code-1.1-Flash.
Nov 1, 2026
4 days ago
2mo newerAug 11, 2026
2 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
LongCat-2.5 is available from Meituan. MAI-Code-1.1-Flash is available from GitHub Copilot.
LongCat-2.5
MAI-Code-1.1-Flash
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against LongCat-2.5 and MAI-Code-1.1-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about LongCat-2.5 vs MAI-Code-1.1-Flash.