Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) by Anthropic or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash by MiniMax? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) scores 7.0 points higher (49.7 vs 42.7) but costs 21× as much to run the benchmark ($5868 vs $283; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 42.7, and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when 42.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 49.7 | 42.7 | −14.1% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 14.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,867.76 | $283.18 | −95.2% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 95.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 40.42s | 22.73s | −43.8% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 43.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh): 14.1% less intelligence, 95.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 43.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Opus 5 (Xhigh)MiniMax-M3.1-FlashToday's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-xhigh/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-xhigh/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill