Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Muse Wonder vs MiniMax M2.5

Muse Wonder leads MiniMax M2.5 on coding, 71.9 to 37.2 on the Vibe Coding Index, and MiniMax M2.5 costs 16.7x less per output token ($1.20 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 38 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Muse Wonder Replace MiniMax M2.5
Muse WonderMeta
Coding
71.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
38
MiniMax M2.5MiniMax
Coding
37.2
Overall
37.3
Output $/M
$1.20
0
vs boards won of 38 shared

Muse Wonder or MiniMax M2.5: which to pick

Pick Muse Wonder for coding: it scores 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 37.2 for MiniMax M2.5.

Pick MiniMax M2.5 for output tokens 16.7x cheaper ($1.20 vs $20.00 per million).

Model AMuse WonderMeta71.9/1003 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BMiniMax M2.5MiniMax37.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.62 per solved task
Shared results
38
Muse Wonder only
22
MiniMax M2.5 only
33
Like-for-like categories
8 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
Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks, MiniMax M2.5 37.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 59.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: Muse Wonder 84.0% against MiniMax M2.5 4.0%, 80.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Muse Wonder $20.00 against MiniMax M2.5 $1.20 per million output tokens, 16.7x apart.
Context window
Muse Wonder takes 1.05M tokens, MiniMax M2.5 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
CategoryMuse WonderBarsMiniMax M2.5Ties
Coding60
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning40
Math30
Knowledge40
Web design60
General130
All shared boards380
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured75.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured68.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev16521386Muse Wonder
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)83.1%14.8%Muse Wonder
Code migration (Vals AI)62.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
IOI (Vals AI)66.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)45.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)26.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)80.4%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
SciCode60.3%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured42.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured618.2Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding15221380Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT15151383Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: React16411374Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: HTML16941414Muse Wonder
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnANot measured10.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE Atlas: RefactoringNot measured19.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE Atlas: Test WritingNot measured18.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured22.8Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index161.8146.6Muse Wonder
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
Design Arena: spreadsheets1258Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)56.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)36.3%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)50.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)23.8%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)67.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)67.0%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)22.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vals Science Index39.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)7.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured95.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,432-$23Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured82.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)27.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)50.1%20.5%Muse Wonder
ARC-AGINot measured63.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured4.9%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts15061372Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert15131378Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15061384Muse Wonder
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured55.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
AIMENot measured88.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ProofBench84.0%4.0%Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: math14861378Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: mathematical work15141378Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured80.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.0%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured59.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured68.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured92.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: science15061369Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare15121357Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government15051366Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance14831356Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites13631222Muse Wonder
Design Arena: UI components13801170Muse Wonder
Design Arena: game dev13791176Muse Wonder
Design Arena: data viz13121172Muse Wonder
Design Arena: 3D14281170Muse Wonder
Design Arena: all code categories13721207Muse Wonder
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1150Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index130
General benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
Vals Index64.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
IFBenchNot measured71.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)80.7%73.3%Muse Wonder
DTBench95.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LMCA56.8%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
CL-benchNot measured11.4%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured6.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text15021359Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following14911353Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing14911331Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: English15071380Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English14921338Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese15371393Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1361Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1171Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1233Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: French15231363Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1353Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian15221359Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1334Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn15101364Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries14931366Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language14961345Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14821329Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMuse WonderMiniMax M2.5Leader
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

Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Muse Wonder$1.00Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.072Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.5 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 Muse Wonder and MiniMax M2.5
SpecificationMeta Muse WonderMiniMax M2.5
MakerMetaMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 12, 2026February 12, 2026
Context window1.05M205K
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.30
Output $/Mtok$20.00$1.20
Coding index71.937.2
Independent measurements behind it33
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.62
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Muse Wonder better than MiniMax M2.5 for coding?

Pick Muse Wonder for coding: it scores 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 37.2 for MiniMax M2.5. Pick MiniMax M2.5 for output tokens 16.7x cheaper ($1.20 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Muse Wonder or MiniMax M2.5?

Muse Wonder costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Muse Wonder or MiniMax M2.5?

Muse Wonder, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the Muse Wonder vs MiniMax M2.5 comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Muse Wonder's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2.5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/meta-muse-wonder-vs-minimax-minimax-m2-5" title="Muse Wonder vs MiniMax M2.5, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/meta-muse-wonder-vs-minimax-minimax-m2-5">LLMBenchmark.ai, Muse Wonder vs MiniMax M2.5</a></p>