Model comparison

MiniMax-M2.1 vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.9 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2.1 MiniMax

38.9

Rank #178 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #181 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 25.9 to 16.6.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 specifications
MiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
ProviderMiniMaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.938.8
Released2025-12-23—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$1.20—
Results tracked2214

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Coding14211314
LMArena WebDev1384—
ALE-Bench623.83—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Terminal-Bench36.6%—

Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Hard Prompts14111299
NYT Connections (extended)11.2%—

Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Math13971298

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Expert14311289
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—

Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Non-English13781265
LMArena Chinese14301314
LMArena German13811231
LMArena Japanese12871207
LMArena Russian13871271
LMArena French1404—
LMArena Korean1298—
LMArena Spanish1397—

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Instruction Following14001275

Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Longer Query14161292

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Text13921299
LMArena Creative Writing13611262
LMArena Multi-Turn13961299

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.9 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper