Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs MiniMax-M2.1

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.2

Rank #302 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.1 MiniMax

38.4

Rank #177 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 35.6 to 10.0.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
ProviderGoogleMiniMax
Noometry Index29.238.4
Released2024-06-242025-12-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K205K
Max output2K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$1.20
Results tracked3422

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Coding12111421
LMArena WebDev—1384
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—
ALE-Bench—623.83

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
Terminal-Bench—36.6%

Reasoning MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Hard Prompts11991410
NYT Connections (extended)—11.2%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.06—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Math12121396
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Expert11721432
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
Confabulations27.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.8%
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Non-English12171378
LMArena Chinese12211430
LMArena French12461405
LMArena German12091380
LMArena Japanese11751287
LMArena Korean11741297
LMArena Russian12341386
LMArena Spanish12281396

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Instruction Following12061399
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Longer Query12311416

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Text12311392
LMArena Creative Writing12411362
LMArena Multi-Turn12241396
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than MiniMax-M2.1?

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B 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; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

Is Gemma 2 27B or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.1 does, with 205K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and MiniMax-M2.1 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper