Skip to content

LongCat 2.0 vs MiniMax M3

LongCat 2.0

Meituan

40#184
vs
MiniMax M3

MiniMax

74#91
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalLongCat 2.0DeltaMiniMax M3
Capabilities
50
-33
83
Pricing
99
--
99
Context window size
86
--
86
Recency
100
--
100
Output Capacity
90
-5
95
Benchmarks
0
-73
73
Overall Result
0 wins
of 6
3 wins
MiniMax M3 wins 3 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (8 data points)
LongCat 2.0MiniMax M3
LongCat 2.0

40

current score

Leader

MiniMax M3

right now

MiniMax M3

73.9

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

LongCat 2.0

Meituan

Per request$0.000900
Daily$3.00
Monthly$90.00
Annual$1080.00

MiniMax M3

MiniMax

Per request$0.000900
Daily$3.00
Monthly$90.00
Annual$1080.00
LongCat 2.0 pricing:
Input:$0.30/M tokens
Output:$1.20/M tokens
MiniMax M3 pricing:
Input:$0.30/M tokens
Output:$1.20/M tokens
LongCat 2.0

Meituan

40

Composite Score

Winner
MiniMax M3

MiniMax

74

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricLongCat 2.0MiniMax M3Winner
Overall Score
40
74
MiniMax M3
Rank#184#91
MiniMax M3
Quality Rank#184#91
MiniMax M3
Adoption Rank#184#91
MiniMax M3
Parameters------
Context Window1049K1049K
LongCat 2.0
Pricing$0.30/$1.20/M$0.30/$1.20/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
50
83
MiniMax M3
Pricing
99
99
LongCat 2.0
Context window size
86
86
LongCat 2.0
Recency
100
100
LongCat 2.0
Output Capacity
90
95
MiniMax M3
Benchmarks--
73
MiniMax M3
Benchmark Head-to-Head(1 benchmarks)
LongCat 2.0: 0MiniMax M3: 0
LongCat 2.0
MiniMax M3
Normalized 0-100%
Arena Elo
-1445
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

LongCat 2.0Entry Level

Scores 40/100 (rank #184), placing it in the top 37% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
MiniMax M3Strong Performer

Scores 74/100 (rank #91), placing it in the top 69% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

MiniMax M3 has a 34-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.

When to Use Each Model

Choose LongCat 2.0 when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose MiniMax M3 when you need:

  • Multimodal workflows that require image understanding
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
LongCat 2.0
Input cost$0.30/M tokens
Output cost$1.20/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.037
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$22.50
MiniMax M3Best Value
Input cost$0.30/M tokens
Output cost$1.20/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.020
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$22.50

Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.

Latency & Speed
LongCat 2.0Faster
Speed score0/100
MiniMax M3
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

LongCat 2.0

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. LongCat 2.0 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

LongCat 2.0

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

LongCat 2.0

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($1.20/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

LongCat 2.0

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (74/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

MiniMax M3

Image understanding & OCR

Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly

MiniMax M3
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
MiniMax M3

MiniMax M3 clearly outperforms LongCat 2.0 with a significant 33.900000000000006-point lead. For most general use cases, MiniMax M3 is the stronger choice. However, LongCat 2.0 may still excel in niche scenarios.

by Meituan

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 0% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
MiniMax M3
Recommended

by MiniMax

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityLongCat 2.0MiniMax M3
Vision (Image Input)differs
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Modediffers
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

LongCat 2.0

Meituan

$1.98
estimated monthly cost

MiniMax M3

MiniMax

$1.98
estimated monthly cost

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterLongCat 2.0MiniMax M3
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Max Output Tokens262,144512,000
Open SourceYesYes
CreatedJul 20, 2026May 31, 2026
Last updated: 10m ago

Related comparisons

LongCat 2.0 vs MiniMax M3 (2026) | LM Market Cap