Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 9B vs MiniMax-M2.7

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 9B Google

25.9

Rank #341 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.7

Rank #196 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 37.7 to 9.7.

Side by side

Gemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
ProviderGoogleMiniMax
Noometry Index25.937.7
Released2024-06-242026-03-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.30
Output $ / M tokens—$1.20
Results tracked3530

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Coding11731454
LMArena WebDev—1398
SciCode—47%
WeirdML—37%
BigCodeBench Instruct34.7%—
LiveBench Coding22.5%—
BigCodeBench Complete40.6%—
ALE-Bench—599.25

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 9B: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench—45.1%
ExploitBench—13.3%
GBAEval—0%

Reasoning MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Hard Prompts11711422
Epoch Capabilities Index119.83145.85
NYT Connections (extended)—24.7%
CritPt—0.6%
Thematic Generalization—39.3%
LiveBench Reasoning15.2%—
LiveBench Data Analysis36.4%—
LiveBench28.7%—
PIQA83.7%—

Math MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Math11831420
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.6%—
ProofBench—3%
LiveBench Math19.8%—
MATH Level 521%—
GSM8K84.9%—

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Expert11471444
GPQA Diamond27.5%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.9%
BoolQ85.7%—
MMLU72.1%—

Multilingual MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English11881382
LMArena Chinese11851441
LMArena French11901421
LMArena German11861398
LMArena Japanese11441262
LMArena Korean11371313
LMArena Russian12001383
LMArena Spanish12001403

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following11781405
LiveBench Instruction Following52.6%—

Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query11971419

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

BenchmarkGemma 2 9BMiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text12071405
LMArena Creative Writing12061354
LMArena Multi-Turn11931412
EQ-Bench Creative Writing841—
LiveBench Language25.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 9B better than MiniMax-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemma 2 9B or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and MiniMax-M2.7 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper