MiniMax M2.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
At a Glance
| Compare |  MiniMax M2.5MiniMax |  DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort | #20 of 4665.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort | #20 of 44$0.094 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort | #14 of 3857.4 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.27Openrouter ↗ · Aug 28, 2026 | $1.30Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $1.08Openrouter ↗ · Aug 28, 2026 | $2.60Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 197K | 1,049K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,358.9094% of row best · rating · minimax-m2.5; 95% CI [1354.93997261, 1362.86079851]; votes 40843; rank 184 | 1,443.95100% of row best · rating · deepseek-v4-pro-high-20260813; 95% CI [1437.16050212, 1450.73220317]; votes 9008; rank 58 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 1 benchmark winNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | MiniMax-M2.5 | DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | MiniMax | DeepSeek |
| Family | Minimax M2 5 | Deepseek V4 Pro |
| Model | MiniMax-M2.5 | DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 |
| Version | MiniMax-M2.5 | DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-02-12 | 2026-08-13 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 197K | 1,049K |
| Total parameters | 228.7B | 1.6T |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 49B |
| License | other | mit |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, tools | agents, chat, coding, generation, reasoning, tools |
MiniMax M2.5 Capabilities
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs | DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs | MiniMax-M3MiniMax | family variantstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peerstext |
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
MiniMax M2.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 FAQs
Is MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both MiniMax M2.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?+
MiniMax M2.5 is $0.27 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is $1.30 per million tokens, so MiniMax M2.5 is cheaper on this metric. MiniMax M2.5 is $1.08 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is $2.60 per million tokens, so MiniMax M2.5 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?+
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 has the larger sourced context window. MiniMax M2.5 supports 197K and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 supports 1,049K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. MiniMax M2.5 is open weight; DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is open weight.
Can MiniMax M2.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 understand images?+
MiniMax M2.5 is not documented with image input; DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. MiniMax M2.5 is — and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is —.
Do MiniMax M2.5 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 support reasoning and tool use?+
MiniMax M2.5: tool calling. DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?+
MiniMax M2.5 has 2 sourced provider routes; DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 has 3, so DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, MiniMax M2.5 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.