Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs MiniMax-M2.7

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 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 . 25 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Google

45.0

Rank #75 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.7

Rank #196 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Pro scores higher in 9 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 56.0 to 37.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 54% for Gemini 2.5 Pro and 37% for MiniMax-M2.7.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 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-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
ProviderGoogleMiniMax
Noometry Index45.037.7
Released2025-03-252026-03-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M205K
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$10$1.20
Results tracked7830

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena WebDev12271398
SciCode42.8%47%
WeirdML54%37%
LMArena Coding14521454
ALE-Bench785.52599.25
SWE-bench Verified57.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)53.6%—
Aider Polyglot83.1%—
GSO3.9%—
LiveBench Coding85.9%—
CadEval64%—
AlgoTune1.51—

Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench32.6%45.1%
GDPval23.3%—
Remote Labor Index0.8%—
TheAgentCompany30.3%—
τ²-bench Banking13.7%—
DeepResearch Bench42.8%—
BALROG43.3%—
ExploitBench—13.3%
GBAEval—0%
LMArena Search1142—
METR Time Horizons55.4%—
Vending-Bench 2573.64—

Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
CritPt2%0.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14551422
Epoch Capabilities Index145.32145.85
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench62.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark70.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)—24.7%
ARC-AGI-141%—
Chess Puzzles20%—
EnigmaEval5.6%—
Thematic Generalization—39.3%
LiveBench Reasoning89.8%—
DTBench82.4%—
LiveBench Data Analysis79.9%—
LMCA34.8%—
ForecastBench61.3—
LiveBench82.3%—

Math Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Math14501420
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)24.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 40%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.7%—
ProofBench—3%
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: 56.0 (#46), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
Vectara Hallucination Rate7%12.9%
LMArena Expert14521444
GPQA Diamond85.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam21.6%—
MMLU-Pro86.3%—
Confabulations10.6%—
GPQA (HELM)74.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18), MiniMax-M2.7: —

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

Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English14511382
LMArena Chinese15071441
LMArena French14721421
LMArena German14871398
LMArena Japanese14611262
LMArena Korean14341313
LMArena Russian14611383
LMArena Spanish14731403

Instruction Following Too close to call

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following14371405
LiveBench Instruction Following80.6%—
IFEval84%—

Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query14491419
Fiction.LiveBench91.7%—

Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Pro leads

Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

BenchmarkGemini 2.5 ProMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text14581405
LMArena Creative Writing14541354
LMArena Multi-Turn14531412
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-M2.7?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 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-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 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-M2.7 better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (42.4 vs 41.8); test both on your own repository before choosing.

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-M2.7 share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper