Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs MiniMax-M2.1
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 2 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 40.4 to 28.4.
- MiniMax-M2.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 38.9 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2025-12-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1421 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1384 |
| WeirdML | 25.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 623.83 |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 36.6% |
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1411 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 11.2% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1397 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1431 |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), MiniMax-M2.1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1378 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1430 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | 1404 |
| LMArena German | 1353 | 1381 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | 1298 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | 1397 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1400 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1416 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1392 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1361 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1396 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than MiniMax-M2.1?
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and MiniMax-M2.1 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.