Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.2-Codex vs MiniMax M2

GPT-5.2-Codex leads MiniMax M2 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 28.5 to 18.6, and MiniMax M2 costs 13.7x less per output token ($1.02 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 11 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.2-CodexOpenAI
Coding
45.4
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$14.00
11
MiniMax M2MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.02
0
vs boards won of 11 shared

GPT-5.2-Codex or MiniMax M2: which to pick

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick MiniMax M2 for output tokens 13.7x cheaper ($1.02 vs $14.00 per million).

Shared results
11
GPT-5.2-Codex only
11
MiniMax M2 only
39
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.2-Codex 45.4 from 3 benchmarks, MiniMax M2 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 17.1 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Terminal-Bench: GPT-5.2-Codex 66.5% against MiniMax M2 30.0%, 36.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 against MiniMax M2 $1.02 per million output tokens, 13.7x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.2-Codex takes 400K tokens, MiniMax M2 205K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-5.2-CodexBarsMiniMax M2Ties
Coding50
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General20
All shared boards110
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index50
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%61.0%GPT-5.2-Codex
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev13391297GPT-5.2-Codex
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)37.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured82.6%Only MiniMax M2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)37.1%25.8%GPT-5.2-Codex
Terminal-Bench66.5%30.0%GPT-5.2-Codex
ALE-Bench1299.9Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1371Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1373Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1329Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13481306GPT-5.2-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
AA Intelligence Index28.518.6GPT-5.2-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1051Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps993Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1090Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1176Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1142Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
τ²-Bench Telecom92.1%86.8%GPT-5.2-Codex
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$161Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.9%77.7%GPT-5.2-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)35.7%13.7%GPT-5.2-Codex
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1357Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1338Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1376Only MiniMax M2 measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured57.8%Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured78.3Only MiniMax M2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.3%Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1351Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1368Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured82.0%Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1348Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1367Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1349Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1336Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1143Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1137Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1118Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1140Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1098Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1135Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1100Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
IFBench77.6%72.3%GPT-5.2-Codex
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.3%64.3%GPT-5.2-Codex
LMArena TextNot measured1340Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1329Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1286Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1364Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1313Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1366Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1357Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1336Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1326Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1330Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1312Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1361Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1331Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1295Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1298Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request
MiniMax M2$0.0008Fits in one request

MiniMax M2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
MiniMax M2$0.016Fits in one request

MiniMax M2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.490Fits in one request
MiniMax M2$0.061Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-5.2-Codex and MiniMax M2
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.2-CodexMiniMax M2
MakerOpenAIMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJanuary 14, 2026October 23, 2025
Context window400K205K
Input $/Mtok$1.75$0.255
Output $/Mtok$14.00$1.02
Coding index45.4Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it31
Cost per solved task$0.43$0.702
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.2-Codex better than MiniMax M2 for coding?

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M2 for output tokens 13.7x cheaper ($1.02 vs $14.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2-Codex or MiniMax M2?

GPT-5.2-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2 costs $0.255 and $1.02. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.2-Codex costs $0.43 and MiniMax M2 $0.702.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2-Codex or MiniMax M2?

GPT-5.2-Codex, with 400K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2-Codex vs MiniMax M2 comparison based on?

11 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.2-Codex's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next