Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs MiniMax-M2.1
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Google
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 1 category and MiniMax-M2.1 in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 58.3 to 24.0.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 38.9 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | 2025-12-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1421 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1384 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 623.83 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 36.6% |
Reasoning Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1411 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 11.2% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1397 |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1431 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1378 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1430 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1387 |
| LMArena French | — | 1404 |
| LMArena German | — | 1381 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1298 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1397 |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1400 |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1416 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads
Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1392 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1361 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1396 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than MiniMax-M2.1?
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2B 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 2B and MiniMax-M2.1 share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.