Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs MiniMax-M2.5
MiniCPM-o 4.5 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M2.5's 57.5 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. MiniMax-M2.5 leads on agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons
Best conversational voice-agent APIs · All 388 voice agents comparisons
MiniCPM-o 4.5OpenBMB · Open-weight model
C61/100#42 of 100 open-weight models
MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax · Open-weight model
C57.5/100#71 of 100 open-weight models
Which one, for what
Best for Agents that need a local model to see, hear and speak on a laptop or a single small GPU, with a plain licence.
Ahead on
- Reach, 90 against 65
- Risk, 40 against 30
- Documentation and upkeep, 66 against 22
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.8 against 1.8 out of 5
Watch for
Speech output and full duplex need trust_remote_code with Transformers 4.51.0 or OpenBMB's llama.cpp-omni
Best for Teams with a 4 to 8 GPU server who want an open agent and coding model with parallel tool calls and can live with its use policy
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 75 against 35
Watch for
230 GB in FP8, and about 155 GB for the smallest 4-bit library build, more than a 128 GB machine
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | MiniCPM-o 4.5 | MiniMax-M2.5 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 90 | 65 | MiniCPM-o 4.5 +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 40 | 30 | MiniCPM-o 4.5 +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 35 | 75 | MiniMax-M2.5 +40 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 66 | 22 | MiniCPM-o 4.5 +44 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 57.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | MiniCPM-o 4.5 | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | OpenBMB | MiniMax |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0; built from Qwen3-8B, SigLIP2, Whisper-medium and CosyVoice2, all Apache 2.0 on their Hub cards | MiniMax Model License (model) and modified MIT (code) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-16 | 2026-02-12 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 1.8/5 (4) |
Verdicts
MiniCPM-o 4.5
A small omni cousin that sees, listens and talks back, with full-duplex speech and voice cloning, in about 7 GB at 4-bit through llama.cpp or Ollama for text and images. Speech output needs OpenBMB's remote code or llama.cpp-omni, and 28 GB of GPU for the full demo. The main risks are repository code and pickle files and no safety results.
MiniMax-M2.5
MiniMax-M2.5 is a 230B mixture-of-experts model for coding and agent work, with parallel tool calls, a 196K context and parsers in vLLM and SGLang. It needs a 4-GPU server for FP8 or about 155 GB for a 4-bit build. The main risk is a licence replaced after release with a Prohibited Uses Policy while the card still says modified MIT.
Before you call either
MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Quickest start for text and images is
ollama run openbmb/minicpm-o4.5, about 6 GB - With vLLM 0.16.0 or later pass
--trust-remote-code, and sendstop_token_ids[151643, 151645] as OpenBMB's guide does - vLLM, llama.cpp and Ollama return text only; for speech out use the card's Transformers 4.51.0 code or OpenBMB's llama.cpp-omni
- In llama.cpp pass both the language GGUF and MiniCPM-o-4_5-vision-F16.gguf with
--mmproj, and use--jinja --reasoning-budget 0to turn thinking off - Keep prompts within 40,960 tokens
- Don't rely on tool calls or JSON output, neither is documented; validate any you get
MiniMax-M2.5
- Start it with vLLM on 4 GPUs of 96 GB, SAFETENSORS_FAST_GPU=1 vllm serve MiniMaxAI/MiniMax-M2.5 --trust-remote-code --tensor-parallel-size 4 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser minimax_m2 --reasoning-parser minimax_m2_append_think
- In SGLang use --tool-call-parser minimax-m2 and --reasoning-parser minimax-append-think, with --trust-remote-code
- MiniMax's guides budget 220 GB for the weights and 240 GB per 1M tokens of KV cache
- On a single large-memory machine, LM Studio's catalogue entry minimax/minimax-m2.5 lists a Q4_K_M GGUF of 138 GB and an MLX 4-bit of 129 GB (Mac only), and LM Studio states 121 GB minimum memory
- Sample with temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 40, as the card recommends
- Budget output tokens for thinking on every turn, since the template always opens a think block
- Read LICENSE-MODEL, not the card's licence link, before shipping, and keep the required Notice text in every copy
- Without the hardware, call it through Novita or Featherless AI; MiniMax's own API retires M2.5 on 18 November 2026
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, MiniCPM-o 4.5 or MiniMax-M2.5?
MiniCPM-o 4.5 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M2.5's 57.5 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. MiniMax-M2.5 leads on agent interface.
Other comparisons with MiniCPM-o 4.5 or MiniMax-M2.5
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniMax-M2.5
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniMax-M2.5
- gpt-oss-20b vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- gpt-oss-20b vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Granite 4.2 3B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Granite 4.2 3B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Inkling-Small vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Inkling-Small vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Inkling vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Inkling vs MiniMax-M2.5
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kimi K3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Kimi K3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs SmolLM3-3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM5-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs SmolLM3-3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/minicpm-o-4-5-vs-minimax-m2-5.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/minicpm-o-4-5.json·/api/v1/tools/minimax-m2-5.json - From a terminal
anchor compare minicpm-o-4-5 minimax-m2-5(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "minicpm-o-4-5", "b": "minimax-m2-5"}at/mcp, no key