Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs MiniMax-M2.7
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and MiniMax-M2.7 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.0 vs 37.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
Google
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite scores higher in 3 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads 38.0 to 25.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Vectara Hallucination Rate: 3.3% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and 12.9% for MiniMax-M2.7.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.7.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
- MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | |
| Noometry Index | 37.0 | 37.7 |
| Released | 2025-06-17 | 2026-03-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 205K |
| Max output | 66K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 33 | 30 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 35.2% | 37% |
| LMArena Coding | 1373 | 1454 |
| ALE-Bench | 325.9 | 599.25 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1398 |
| SciCode | — | 47% |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 45.1% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 36.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | — | 13.3% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1377 | 1422 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.94 | 145.85 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 24.7% |
| CritPt | — | 0.6% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 39.3% |
| DTBench | 62.8% | — |
| LMCA | 18.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1373 | 1420 |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| Omni-MATH | 48% | — |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.3% | 12.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1373 | 1444 |
| MMLU-Pro | 53.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114), MiniMax-M2.7: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1198 | — |
| VPCT | 30% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1369 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1404 | 1441 |
| LMArena French | 1388 | 1421 |
| LMArena German | 1389 | 1398 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1359 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | 1313 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1383 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | 1403 |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | 1405 |
| IFEval | 81% | — |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1419 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 47.2% | — |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1379 | 1405 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1367 | 1354 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1366 | 1412 |
| WildBench | 81.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better than MiniMax-M2.7?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and MiniMax-M2.7 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.0 vs 37.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or MiniMax-M2.7?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.7 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and MiniMax-M2.7 share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.