Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 5.5vsMiniMax M2.5
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsMiniMax M2.5

MiniMax M2.5 is cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5 at $0.3/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 and MiniMax M2.5 compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5MiniMax M2.5
Input price$4/M tokens$0.3/M tokens
Output price$20/M tokens$1.2/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens205K tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Feb 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 5.5900 words
HarborTech Services: 5-Year LBO Underwriting Conventions: $m. Interest is charged on beginning-of-year balances, which avoids circularity. Term Loan (TL) amortization is 1% of the original $480m, or $4.8m per year. Mezz PIK accrues to principal. All FCF after mandatory debt service sweeps to the TL.
Read the full answer
MiniMax M2.5688 words
1. FY 2026 – FY 2030 cash‑flow build‑up ($ m) FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 Revenue 972.0 1 040.0 1 102.4 1 157.6 1 215.4 EBITDA (‑% margin) 136.1 (14 %) 156.0 (15 %) 176.4 (16 %) 192.0 (16.5 %) 206.6 (17 %) Cash interest – TL (9 %) 43.2 41.0 37.6 32.8 26.8 Cash interest – Mezz (12 %) 21.6 22.0 22.5 22.9 23.4…
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Claude Opus 5.53,435 words
The Transistor in 1920: A Counterfactual Through 1980 First, a Reality Check on the Premise A transistor "invented" in 1920 would not have changed the world in 1920. The actual 1947 transistor rested on three foundations that did not exist yet: Quantum theory of solids.
Read the full answer
MiniMax M2.51,206 words
This is a fascinating counterfactual that ripples across every dimension of modern history. Let’s construct a plausible timeline, assuming a functional transistor (or at least a solid-state amplifier) emerges in the early 1920s, based on theoretical work by Lilienfeld (1926) and others, but made practical a…
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Claude Opus 5.53,099 words
The 90-Day Longevity & Performance Protocol A structured, measurable plan for the experienced biohacker How to Use This Plan Philosophy: Measure → Intervene → Re-measure. Every intervention has a hypothesis, a metric, and a decision rule.
Read the full answer
MiniMax M2.5535 words
Comprehensive 3-Month Longevity & Performance Optimization Plan Disclaimer: This plan involves advanced biohacking protocols. Consult a physician before starting, especially if you have health conditions. Some interventions (e.g., rapamycin, NR/NMN) are investigational. Monitor biomarkers regularly.
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Claude Opus 5.52,280 words
Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Editor The most serious problems cluster in three areas: the sync model (client-clock LWW), cross-server propagation (per-server WebSockets with DB polling), and the CDN/auth layer, which can leak data between users. Issues are grouped by area below.
Read the full answer
MiniMax M2.5949 words
Potential Failure Modes, Race Conditions, and Scaling Bottlenecks WebSocket Broadcasting Limited to Same Server Issue: Users connected to different servers experience up to 2-second delays, and cross-server updates rely on polling.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Claude Opus 5.5936 words
The 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch "Decodes neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy. Works with any language, any device." (Slide 3) Why it's weak: It far exceeds the published state of the art. The best results for thought-to-text come from invasive implants.
Read the full answer
MiniMax M2.5407 words
Based on the pitch deck, here are the three weakest claims and recommendations to strengthen them: Weakest Claim: "MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it." (Slide 1 - Vision) Why it's weak: This claim is scientifically implausible with current technology.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Claude Opus 5.5300 words
Midnight Silk Noodles Creamy, tangy peanut noodles with a gentle kick, ready faster than takeout. Serves: 2 Prep time: 5 minutes Cook time: 10 minutes Total time: 15 minutes The 7 Ingredients 8 oz (225 g) spaghetti (or any long noodle) ¼ cup creamy peanut butter 3 tablespoons soy sauce 1 tablespoon honey (or sugar) 1…
Read the full answer
MiniMax M2.5297 words
Creative Name: Velvet‑Vanilla Pocket Cake Why it works: Only 7 shelf‑stable (or nearly‑shelf‑stable) staples are needed, and the whole thing comes together in one bowl in under 30 minutes.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
MiniMax M2.5
MiniMax M2.5Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Claude Opus 5.5 has the edge: newer, bigger context window, major provider backing.

MiniMax M2.5 costs 17x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 5.5
Input
$4.00
Output
$20.00
MiniMax M2.5
Input
$0.30
13× cheaper
Output
$1.20
17× cheaper

MiniMax M2.5 is cheaper on both: 13× input, 17× output.

Where to run it

11 hosts, cheapest first

Claude Opus 5.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·99.8% upAzure AI Foundry$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upAnthropic$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upGoogle Vertex AI$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% up
MiniMax M2.57 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
VVenice$0.27 in·$0.95 out·198k·86.5% upSStreamLake$0.27 in·$1.08 out·200k·99.8% upAAtlasCloudfp8$0.29 in·$1.20 out·197k·99.6% upFFriendli$0.30 in·$1.20 out·197k·100% upMiniMaxfp8$0.30 in·$1.20 out·205k·99.7% upNNovitafp8$0.30 in·$1.20 out·205k·99.8% up
1 more hostFewer hosts
DDigitalOceandegraded$0.30 in·$1.20 out·66k·75.2% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while MiniMax M2.5 is developed by MiniMax. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs MiniMax M2.5's 205K. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5.5 and MiniMax M2.5 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/M input tokens and MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.3/M input tokens. MiniMax M2.5 is $3.70/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5.5 and MiniMax M2.5 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
MiniMax M2.5 logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
MiniMax M2.5 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
MiniMax M2.5 logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
MiniMax M2.5 vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
MiniMax M2.5 logoGPT-6 Luna logo
MiniMax M2.5 vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Fable 5.1 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1Same lab
MiniMax M2.5 logoMiniMax M2.7 logo
MiniMax M2.5 vs MiniMax M2.7Version compare
MiniMax M2.5 logoMiniMax M3 logo
MiniMax M2.5 vs MiniMax M3Version compare
Claude Opus 5.5 logoQwen3 Coder Flash logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 Coder FlashNew provider
Claude Opus 5.5 logoQwen3 Coder Next logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 Coder NextSame size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoQwen3 Coder Plus logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Qwen3 Coder PlusSame size
MiniMax M2.5 logoQwen3 Max logo
MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen3 MaxNew provider

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
MiniMax M2.5 logo
MiniMax M2.553 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed