Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs MiniMax M3

vs

Quale scegliere e quando

minimax-m3 genera testo a minor costo, accetta video e offre un limite di output molto più alto. Scegli claude-sonnet-5-5 se gli output strutturati sono indispensabili; questa funzione non è elencata per minimax-m3.

Prezzi

Claude Sonnet 5.5 MiniMax M3 Δ
Input / 1M token $2 $0.3 6.7×
Output / 1M token $10 $1.2 8.3×
Lettura cache / 1M token $0.1 $0.06 1.7×
Scrittura in cache 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) nessun addebito separato -

Tariffe lette dal catalogo live al momento della build; il listino aggiornato è sulla pagina di ciascun modello.

Dove si collocano: prezzo di input per 1M di token tra tutti i modelli di chat con questa unità di fatturazione (80, scala logaritmica)

$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

Funzionalità

Claude Sonnet 5.5 MiniMax M3
Tool use sì sì
Controllo del ragionamento sempre attivo configurabile
Output strutturato sì -
Prompt caching esplicito (contrassegni tu il prefisso) implicito (automatico)
Durata della cache 5m default, 1h option non pubblicato
Prefisso minimo in cache 512 token 512 token

Specifiche

Claude Sonnet 5.5 MiniMax M3
Modalità di input testo immagine testo immagine video
Modalità di output testo testo
Rilascio 2026-09-28 2026-06-01
Knowledge cutoff 2026-06 -
Finestra di contesto 1M 1M
Output massimo 128K 524K
Parametro di ragionamento thinking.type
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_split
Valori accettati
thinking.type
  • adaptive (default)
  • between_tools
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
reasoning_split
  • boolean
Valore di default adaptive, effort high adaptive: thinking on, with the model deciding when extra reasoning helps

Le specifiche sono riprese dalla documentazione di ciascun provider; se un provider non pubblica un dato, la riga viene omessa e non dedotta. Fonti complete: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · MiniMax M3

Un solo prompt, entrambi i modelli, misurati attraverso il gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. VERIFICA esattamente 3 frasi

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superato · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model "think" before it answers, and that internal thinking is generated as extra text (reasoning tokens) that we are billed for at the same rate as output tokens, even though users never see it. Output tokens also cost several times more than input tokens, so a single request that used to produce a short answer can now generate many times more billable text behind the scenes. Because our request volume and prompts didn't change, the doubling comes almost entirely from this hidden thinking, and we can bring it down by limiting reasoning effort, turning it off for simple tasks, and reserving it for the workloads where the accuracy gain justifies the cost.

out 205 tok latenza 3.6 s

MiniMax M3 superato · 3 sentences

Reasoning models don't just answer — they first generate extensive internal "thinking" tokens to work through the problem step-by-step, and you're billed for all of those tokens even though users never see them. A query that previously cost ~200 tokens may now cost 2,000–10,000 once reasoning is enabled, multiplying per-query spend by roughly 5–50x while the visible output stayed the same size — that's the doubling. The lever is tuning: cap reasoning effort on simple queries, cache the reasoning traces, and reserve the full reasoning model for only your hardest 10–20% of requests, which typically restores 60–80% of the savings.

out 764 tok (+629 ragionamento) latenza 3.5 s

Rispetto delle istruzioni (esattamente tre frasi: si contano), adattamento al destinatario (registro da CFO) e lo scarto di fatturazione dovuto al ragionamento nascosto, che i contatori di token qui sotto mettono in luce.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. VERIFICA la correzione supera i test

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superato · 8/8 cases

**The bug:** `cur` counts the number of *adjacent equal pairs* rather than the number of items in the run. A run of length k contains only k−1 such pairs, so every result is one too small. The counter also starts at 0 and the loop starts at index 1, so a single-element list never updates `best` and returns 0 instead of 1. (An empty list should return 0.) In addition, `cur` resets to 0 on a mismatch, when it should reset to 1, because the item at `xs[i]` begins a new run of length 1. The claim that it "misses runs ending at the last index" is really the same off-by-one: the final run is counted, but as one less than its true length. Because `best` is updated inside the loop on every extension, the last run isn't skipped. […]

out 444 tok latenza 6.7 s

MiniMax M3 superato · 8/8 cases

The bug is that the loop starts at index 1 and treats `cur` as the number of *equal transitions* rather than the run length, so a run of *k* consecutive equal items is reported as `k − 1`, and a single-element list (where the loop body never executes) returns 0 instead of 1. A correct version tracks the actual run length by seeding `cur = 1` and resetting it to 1 (not 0) on a mismatch: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 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 ``` Now `[5]` returns `1`, `[1,1,1]` returns `3`, and a run like `[1,2,2,2]` that ends at the last index is correctly captured as `3` because `cur` is updated before `best` is compared on every iteration, including the final one.

out 845 tok (+596 ragionamento) latenza 3.5 s

Se la correzione è davvero giusta (si può eseguire), quanto è densa la spiegazione e quanti token servono per un compito circoscritto.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. VERIFICA JSON valido, schema esatto

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superato · 5/5 fields, guidance null

Here is the extracted JSON: ```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on the choices: - **quarter**: The text says "September quarter" without specifying a fiscal year or Q-number, so I kept the wording as stated. - **revenue_usd_m**: The text gives "412" for the topline, with no currency or unit stated explicitly. I've taken it as 412 million USD per the field definition, but the text does not confirm that, and the figure is constant-currency. - **growth_pct**: "Eleven and change" means slightly above 11, so 11 is an approximation. The exact figure isn't given. - **guidance**: Guidance is withheld pending the Q4 close, so no guidance is stated, hence null.

out 300 tok latenza 3.5 s

MiniMax M3 superato · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": null, "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null } ```

out 1002 tok (+955 ragionamento) latenza 3.6 s

Aderenza allo schema (nessun campo inventato), tentazione di allucinare (il testo dice espressamente che la guidance non viene comunicata) e differenze tra i percorsi di output strutturato.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. VERIFICA 120 parole, 0 parole vietate

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superato · 122 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** Your API gateway now caches prompts across every connected LLM provider, whether you route traffic to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or a self-hosted model. Here's how it works: the gateway fingerprints each prompt prefix, stores it centrally, and applies the right provider-specific caching mechanism automatically. When you switch providers or fail over during an outage, your cached context follows you. Early testing shows input token costs dropping by up to 70% on repeated system prompts and long documents, with latency improvements of 40% or more on cache hits. Tired of paying to send the same instructions thousands of times a day? Enable it with one configuration flag. Cache rules, TTLs, and per-team isolation are available in the dashboard today.

out 266 tok latenza 3.8 s

MiniMax M3 superato · 121 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing PromptCache, our intelligent caching layer for the API gateway. Tired of paying twice for identical requests? The feature stores prompt-response pairs across every connected provider, returning cached results instead of hitting costly endpoints. Deployment requires only a single configuration flag, and semantic similarity detection happens automatically. Latency drops up to 70% on repeated traffic while costs follow the same downward curve. Developers access detailed cache hit metrics, eviction logs, and provider breakdowns through the dashboard. Whether routing to OpenAI, Anthropic, or local models, every cached token saves time and money. The cache respects TTL policies, supports manual purging, and encrypts stored content. Available today for Pro and Enterprise tiers—enable PromptCache on existing endpoints and watch inference bills shrink immediately.

out 2808 tok (+2656 ragionamento) latenza 6.0 s

Rispetto dei vincoli (budget di parole, elenco di parole vietate, l'unica domanda), impronta stilistica e controllo della lunghezza.

Passa dall'uno all'altro cambiando una sola riga

In ogni scheda qui sotto ci sono entrambi gli id: le due righe evidenziate sono l'unica modifica. Stesso endpoint, stessa chiave, stessa struttura della richiesta.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-5-5",
    # model="minimax-m3",  # decommenta questa riga, commenta quella sopra
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Ottieni la tua chiave API →

FAQ

Qual è il più economico, Claude Sonnet 5.5 o MiniMax M3?

MiniMax M3 costa meno alla voce Input / 1M token ($0.3 contro $2, 6.7× di differenza). Altre voci potrebbero dire il contrario: la tabella qui sopra riporta il listino completo, e il costo reale dipende dal tuo mix di utilizzo.

Posso fare un A/B test di Claude Sonnet 5.5 contro MiniMax M3 senza due integrazioni?

Sì. Si chiamano entrambi dallo stesso endpoint compatibile con OpenAI, con una sola chiave API. Per passare dall'uno all'altro basta cambiare la stringa del modello in una riga, quindi puoi mandare una parte del traffico a ciascuno e confrontare direttamente i costi.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 e MiniMax M3 supportano il prompt caching?

Sì: entrambi fanno pagare le letture dalla cache meno della tariffa di input, quindi i carichi di lavoro con un prefisso già in cache costano meno di quanto facciano pensare le tariffe di listino. Le voci esatte per la lettura dalla cache sono nella tabella dei prezzi qui sopra.

Confronti correlati

Dai nostri studi con dati misurati