claude-opus-4-8
Checking current pricing…
Chat comparison
claude-opus-4-8vsminimax-m3
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
minimax-m3
Checking current pricing…
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
claude-opus-4-8Better fit
1,000,000 tokens
minimax-m3
512,000 tokens
Input formats
claude-opus-4-8
text, image
minimax-m3
text
Vision
claude-opus-4-8Better fit
Supported
minimax-m3
Not supported
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
claude-opus-4-8
95.92%
minimax-m3
100%
Average response time
claude-opus-4-8
14,142.81 ms
minimax-m3
18,868.2 ms
P95 API latency
claude-opus-4-8
60,000 ms
minimax-m3
60,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
claude-opus-4-8: 100%minimax-m3: 100%
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
claude-opus-4-8: 2,396 msminimax-m3: 21,794 ms
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
claude-opus-4-8: 10,000 msminimax-m3: 60,000 ms
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Checking current pricing…
Checking current pricing…
Quick take
- claude-opus-4-8 has a larger context window.
- claude-opus-4-8 supports image input while the other model does not.
- minimax-m3 recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.