Claude Opus 5 vs MiniMax M3
Cuál usar y cuándo — veredicto seleccionado, no una tabla de benchmarks
Ambos comparten una ventana de contexto de 1000000 tokens y aceptan entrada de texto e imagen, por lo que la diferencia es el costo y la forma: minimax-m3 cuesta $0.3 en entrada y $1.2 en salida frente a $5 y $25 de claude-opus-5, aproximadamente 16x y 20x más barato, y también admite entrada de video con una salida máxima de 524288 tokens. Elija claude-opus-5 cuando desee su capacidad de pensamiento explícito (que puede ser desactivada) y su stack de herramientas y código de Anthropic en trabajos de alto valor; elija minimax-m3 para entrada de video, generaciones muy largas, o razonamiento de alto volumen donde importa la tarifa de lectura de caché de $0.06.
Precios
| Claude Opus 5 | MiniMax M3 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entrada / 1M tokens | $5 | $0.3 | 17× |
| Salida / 1M tokens | $25 | $1.2 | 21× |
| Lectura de caché / 1M tokens | $0.5 | $0.06 | 8.3× |
| Escritura en caché | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | sin cargo por separado | — |
Tarifas del catálogo en vivo en el momento de la compilación; la página de cada modelo incluye la ficha actualizada.
Dónde se sitúan — precio de entrada por 1M de tokens en todos los 63 modelos de chat en esta unidad de facturación (escala logarítmica)
Capacidades
| Claude Opus 5 | MiniMax M3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Uso de herramientas | sí | sí |
| Control de pensamiento | configurable | configurable |
| Salida estructurada | sí | — |
| Caché de prompt | explícito (marcas el prefijo) | implícito (automático) |
| Tiempo de vida de la caché | 5m default, 1h option | no publicado |
| Prefijo mínimo en caché | 1024 tokens | 512 tokens |
Especificaciones
| Claude Opus 5 | MiniMax M3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Modalidades de entrada | texto imagen | texto imagen vídeo |
| Modalidades de salida | texto | texto |
| Lanzamiento | 2026-07-24 | 2026-06-01 |
| Límite de conocimiento | 2026-05 | — |
| Ventana de contexto | 1M | 1M |
| Salida máxima | 128K | 524K |
| Parámetro de pensamiento |
|
|
| Valores aceptados | thinking.type
effort
| thinking.type
reasoning_split
|
| Predeterminado | thinking on effort
| adaptive: thinking on, with the model deciding when extra reasoning helps |
Las especificaciones se transcriben de la documentación de cada proveedor; si un proveedor no publica una fila, se omite en lugar de inferirse. Fuentes completas: Claude Opus 5 · MiniMax M3
Un prompt, ambos modelos — medido a través del gateway
Claude Opus 5 superado · 3 sentences
When reasoning is enabled, the model generates a hidden chain of "thinking" tokens before it writes the visible answer, and those internal tokens are billed at the output rate even though no one ever sees them — commonly 3–10x more tokens than the response itself. Because output tokens are priced several times higher than input tokens, that added volume hits us at our most expensive rate, which is why the bill roughly doubled while our request count stayed flat. The spend is controllable: we can cap the reasoning budget per call, route only genuinely hard requests to reasoning mode and cheaper models for the rest, and track cost per successfully completed task rather than cost per token, since a single correct answer usually beats three cheap retries plus human cleanup.
salida 529 tok latencia 9.0 s
MiniMax M3 superado · 3 sentences
Reasoning-enabled models deliberately produce extensive internal "chain-of-thought" tokens before answering, often consuming 5–10x more tokens per query than a standard model. Because LLM providers bill per token for both that reasoning trace and the final response, your cost-per-query rises proportionally—and that multiplier is the primary driver of the doubled bill. The right response isn't to disable reasoning, but to route only genuinely complex queries to it while keeping routine traffic on the cheaper standard tier, which typically recovers 60–80% of the cost without sacrificing quality where it matters.
salida 665 tok (+548 pensamiento) latencia 5.7 s
Seguimiento de la instrucción (exactamente tres frases — contables), adaptación a la audiencia (registro de CFO), y la brecha de facturación por pensamiento oculto que los medidores de tokens de abajo dejan ver.
Claude Opus 5 superado · 8/8 cases
## Fixed version ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 if cur > best: best = cur return best ``` ## The bug The counters were tracking the wrong quantity: `cur` counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *elements in the current run*, and both counters started at `0` instead of `1`. Since a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* adjacent equal pairs, every result came back one too small — `[1, 1]` returned 1, `[3, 3, 3]` returned 2 — and a single-element list returned 0 because the loop body never executed and `best` kept its initial value of `0`. […]
salida 1094 tok latencia 16.1 s
MiniMax M3 superado · 8/8 cases
The bug is in the loop bound: `range(1, len(xs))` iterates from index 1 up to but not including `len(xs) - 1`... wait, actually it goes up to `len(xs) - 1`, so the last index is included. The real problems are two: 1. **Starting `best` and `cur` at 0** and iterating from index 1 means a single-element list (`len(xs) == 1`) never enters the loop, so the function returns `0` instead of `1`. The fix is to either seed `best = cur = 1` when `xs` is non-empty, or include index 0 in the loop logic. 2. **Missing the final run**: the function only updates `best` *inside* the loop when it finds a continuation. If the longest run ends at the very last element, the loop body never gets to compare it after the increment — actually it does, but only if the run is longer than the previous `best`. […]
salida 464 tok latencia 7.9 s
Si el arreglo es realmente correcto (ejecutable), la densidad de la explicación, y la eficiencia en tokens sobre una tarea acotada.
Claude Opus 5 superado · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: - **quarter**: "September quarter" is labeled Q3 because the text refers to an upcoming "Q4 close," implying a calendar-aligned fiscal year. No fiscal year is given. - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is stated as constant-currency and hedged ("call it"), so it's approximate; the currency is not explicitly stated as USD. - **growth_pct**: "up eleven and change" means slightly more than 11, so 11 is a floor rather than an exact figure.
salida 539 tok latencia 7.6 s
MiniMax M3 superado · 5/5 fields, guidance null
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ```
salida 2212 tok (+2161 pensamiento) latencia 23.3 s
Obediencia al esquema (sin campos inventados), presión de alucinación (guidance se retiene explícitamente), y diferencias en la ruta de salida estructurada.
Claude Opus 5 superado · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** We're introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching in the API Gateway. Repeated system prompts, long documents, and few-shot examples are stored once at the gateway layer and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Instead of paying full input token costs on every request, your application sends a cache reference, and the gateway rehydrates the context before forwarding it downstream. Why does that matter? Teams running high-volume agents and retrieval pipelines typically see input token spend fall 40 to 70 percent, with median latency dropping by several hundred milliseconds. Caches are scoped per project, encrypted at rest, and invalidated automatically when a prompt template changes. Enable it with a single header, and see the docs for TTL tuning and per-route controls.
salida 1593 tok latencia 19.1 s
MiniMax M3 superado · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Introducing PromptCache, our new API gateway feature that caches prompts across multiple LLM providers. Developers can store prompt-completion pairs centrally, reducing redundant inference calls and lowering costs without sacrificing quality. How will your workflow change when repeated requests resolve instantly from a shared cache layer? The gateway intercepts outgoing requests, checks for matching prompt fingerprints, and serves previously generated completions when available, falling back to the original provider on misses. Compatible with OpenAI, Anthropic, Cohere, and custom endpoints, PromptCache integrates with existing routing rules and supports TTL, versioning, and per-tenant namespaces. Teams now gain predictable latency, reduced token spend, and improved throughput during traffic spikes today. […]
salida 3256 tok (+2892 pensamiento) latencia 21.5 s
Obediencia a las restricciones (presupuesto de palabras, lista de palabras prohibidas, la única pregunta), huella de estilo, y control de la longitud.
Cambia entre ellos con una línea
Ambos IDs están en cada pestaña a continuación — el par de líneas resaltadas es la única edición. Mismo endpoint, misma clave, misma estructura de solicitud.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="claude-opus-5",
# model="minimax-m3", # descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "claude-opus-5",
// model: "minimax-m3", // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "claude-opus-5",
# "model": "minimax-m3", # descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "claude-opus-5",
// Model: "minimax-m3", // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("claude-opus-5")
// .model("minimax-m3") // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));Preguntas frecuentes
¿Cuál es más barato, Claude Opus 5 o MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 es más barato en entrada / 1m tokens ($0.3 vs $5, con una diferencia de 17×). Otras filas pueden indicar lo contrario — la tabla anterior muestra la ficha completa, y el costo real depende de su combinación.
¿Puedo hacer pruebas A/B de Claude Opus 5 frente a MiniMax M3 sin dos integraciones?
Sí. Ambos se sirven a través del mismo endpoint compatible con OpenAI con una clave API — el cambio es una modificación de una línea en la cadena del modelo, por lo que puede enrutar una fracción del tráfico a cada uno y comparar las facturas directamente.
¿Admiten Claude Opus 5 y MiniMax M3 caché de prompts?
Sí — ambos cobran las lecturas en caché por debajo de su tarifa de entrada, por lo que las cargas de trabajo con prefijo caliente cuestan menos de lo que sugieren las tarifas de lista. Las filas exactas de lectura en caché están en la tabla de precios de arriba.