Model comparison
Gemma 2 9B vs MiniMax-M2.1
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 38.3 to 9.7.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 38.9 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2025-12-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 35 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1173 | 1421 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1384 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 623.83 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: —, MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 36.6% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1171 | 1411 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 11.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.83 | — |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |
Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1183 | 1397 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | 1431 |
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.8% |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | 1378 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | 1430 |
| LMArena French | 1190 | 1404 |
| LMArena German | 1186 | 1381 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | 1298 |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | 1397 |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | 1400 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | 1416 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | 1392 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | 1361 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | 1396 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 9B better than MiniMax-M2.1?
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 9B or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and MiniMax-M2.1 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.