Model comparison
MiniMax-M2 vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2 costs 5.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 41.7 to 19.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 14.8% for MiniMax-M2 and 74.1% for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- MiniMax-M2 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
- Qwen3.6 Max Preview accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 205K.
- MiniMax-M2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.4 | 51.5 |
| Released | 2025-10-27 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $1.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | $7.80 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 39.3 (#159), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.7 (#54)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1297 | 1482 |
| LMArena Coding | 1370 | 1471 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 61% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiniMax-M2: 25.1 (#109), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | 160.6 | 4,254 |
| Terminal-Bench | 30% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 19.4 (#258), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 41.7 (#53)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 14.8% | 74.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1357 | 1457 |
| SimpleBench | — | 63% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 19% |
| DTBench | — | 87.2% |
| LMCA | — | 42.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.24 |
Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 37.3 (#160), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.1 (#46)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1465 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 23.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 37.0 (#163), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#39)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1337 | 1478 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 52% |
Multilingual Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 45.3 (#171), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.2 (#48)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1437 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1366 | 1487 |
| LMArena French | 1335 | 1449 |
| LMArena Russian | 1331 | 1445 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1326 | 1454 |
| LMArena German | 1355 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 70.2 (#166), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.7 (#55)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1328 | 1438 |
Long Context Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#153), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#61)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1331 | 1457 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiniMax-M2: 53.0 (#162), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 63.8 (#60)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1286 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1361 | 1456 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax-M2 better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2 costs 5.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
MiniMax-M2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.
Is MiniMax-M2 or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 39.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview does, with 262K tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2 and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.