Model Comparison
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort)
vs. MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Anthropic, OpenBMB
Recommended Pick
An Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort)
59.7 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort)
48.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) leads MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B by 43.7 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) leads MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B by 47.4 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) wins 11 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B
OpenBMB
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick An Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) | Op MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $6.25/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $25.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $10.94/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenBMB |
| Release Date | Feb 5, 2026 | May 11, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 47.3 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 12090ms | — |
| Latency | 12090ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 59.7 | 16.0 |
| Intelligence | 52.9 | 12.7 |
| Coding | 48.1 | 0.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 89.6% | 30.5% |
| HLE | 36.7% | 4.9% |
| SciCode | 51.9% | 2.1% |
| LCR | 70.7% | 6.3% |
| IFBench | 53.1% | 26.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 92.1% | 87.7% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 46.2% | 0.0% |
Key Takeaways
MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 59.7 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) reaches a 48.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude Opus 4.6 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
