Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs MiniMax-M2.1

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.1 costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

44.9

Rank #67 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.1 MiniMax

38.4

Rank #177 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 8 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 55.8 to 37.7.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for Gemini 2.5 Pro.
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 205K.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 Pro and MiniMax-M2.1 specifications
Gemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
ProviderGoogleMiniMax
Noometry Index44.938.4
Released2025-03-252025-12-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M205K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$10$1.20
Results tracked7822

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

Category by category

Coding Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.8 (#86), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena WebDev12271384
LMArena Coding14521421
ALE-Bench785.52623.83
SWE-bench Verified57.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)53.6%—
Aider Polyglot83.1%—
SciCode42.8%—
GSO3.9%—
WeirdML54%—
LiveBench Coding85.9%—
CadEval64%—
AlgoTune1.51—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.1 (#81), MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
Terminal-Bench32.6%36.6%
GDPval23.3%—
Remote Labor Index0.8%—
TheAgentCompany30.3%—
τ²-bench Banking13.7%—
DeepResearch Bench42.8%—
BALROG43.3%—
LMArena Search1142—
METR Time Horizons55.4%—
Vending-Bench 2573.64—

Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#85), MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Hard Prompts14551410
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench62.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)—11.2%
ARC-AGI-141%—
CritPt2%—
Chess Puzzles20%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning89.8%—
DTBench82.4%—
LiveBench Data Analysis79.9%—
LMCA34.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.32—
ForecastBench61.3—
LiveBench82.3%—

Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 31.9 (#191), MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Math14501396
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)24.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 40%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.7%—
Omni-MATH41.6%—
LiveBench Math90.2%—
MATH Level 595.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)14.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.8 (#41), MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
Vectara Hallucination Rate7%11.8%
LMArena Expert14521432
GPQA Diamond85.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam21.6%—
MMLU-Pro86.3%—
Confabulations10.6%—
GPQA (HELM)74.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 44.5 (#16), MiniMax-M2.1: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Vision1263—
GeoBench86%—
VPCT48%—
LMArena Document1421—
SpatialViz-Bench44.7%—

Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.5 (#30), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Non-English14521378
LMArena Chinese15071430
LMArena French14731405
LMArena German14871380
LMArena Japanese14621287
LMArena Korean14351297
LMArena Russian14601386
LMArena Spanish14731396

Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.2 (#71), MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Instruction Following14361399
LiveBench Instruction Following80.6%—
IFEval84%—

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.7 (#5), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Longer Query14491416
Fiction.LiveBench91.7%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.9 (#60), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Text14581392
LMArena Creative Writing14531362
LMArena Multi-Turn14531396
Short-Story Creative Writing83.8%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1421—
WildBench85.7%—
LiveBench Language67.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro better than MiniMax-M2.1?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.1 costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or MiniMax-M2.1?

MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Pro lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?

Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.8 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Pro and MiniMax-M2.1 share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper