Model comparison
MiniMax M1 vs Qwen2.5-Max
MiniMax M1 and Qwen2.5-Max score almost the same on the Noometry Index (40.3 vs 40.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax M1 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- MiniMax M1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.3 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2025-06-13 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 40K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.55 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 18 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax M1: 39.9 (#153), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1359 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Reasoning MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1339 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Too close to call
MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1361 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1317 | 1337 |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1319 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1360 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1370 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1350 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1217 | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | 1266 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1329 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1353 | 1377 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1312 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Too close to call
MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1326 | 1358 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 69.4% | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1343 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1298 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1335 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen2.5-Max?
MiniMax M1 and Qwen2.5-Max score almost the same on the Noometry Index (40.3 vs 40.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen2.5-Max share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.