GPT-5 mini (High) vs LongCat 2.0
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 mini (High) by OpenAI or LongCat 2.0 by LongCat? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
LongCat 2.0 scores 2.3 points higher (19.1 vs 16.8) but costs 2.9× as much to run the benchmark ($545 vs $189; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick LongCat 2.0 when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GPT-5 mini (High).
| Metric | GPT-5 mini (High) | LongCat 2.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.8 | 19.1 | +13.7% LongCat 2.0 is 13.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $188.66 | $544.74 | +188.7% LongCat 2.0 is 2.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 58.72s | 35.54s | −39.5% LongCat 2.0 is 39.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $2.00 | $0.75 / $2.95 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
LongCat 2.0 vs GPT-5 mini (High): 13.7% more intelligence, 188.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 39.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5 mini (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
- LongCat 2.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
GPT-5 mini (High)LongCat 2.0Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-mini/longcat-2-0 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-mini/longcat-2-0?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill