Model comparison

Gemma 3 27B vs MiniMax-M2.1

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemma 3 27B costs 5.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 18 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 3 27B

Google

30.8

Rank #284 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.1

MiniMax

38.9

Rank #178 Confirmed

Summary

They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 1 category and MiniMax-M2.1 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in coding, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 40.4 to 22.5.
Gemma 3 27B is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.16 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.1.
MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax-M2.1 specifications
	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
Provider	Google	MiniMax
Noometry Index	30.8	38.9
Released	2025-03-11	2025-12-23
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	131K	205K
Max output	8K	131K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.08	$0.30
Output $ / M tokens	$0.16	$1.20
Results tracked	43	22

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Coding	1322	1421
Aider Polyglot	4.9%	—
LMArena WebDev	—	1384
SciCode	21.2%	—
LiveBench Coding	39.9%	—
ALE-Bench	—	623.83

Agentic & Tool Use MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110), MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
Terminal-Bench	—	36.6%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	29.5%	—

Reasoning Too close to call

Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301), MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Hard Prompts	1340	1411
Kagi LLM Benchmark	40.4%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	—	11.2%
CritPt	0%	—
Chess Puzzles	0%	—
LiveBench Reasoning	43.8%	—
DTBench	52.5%	—
LiveBench Data Analysis	51.5%	—
LMCA	12.3%	—
Epoch Capabilities Index	130.04	—
LiveBench	50%	—

Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Math	1312	1397
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	22.5%	—
LiveBench Math	55.4%	—
MATH Level 5	74%	—

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
Vectara Hallucination Rate	7.4%	11.8%
LMArena Expert	1304	1431
GPQA Diamond	47.7%	—
Confabulations	40.3%	—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100), MiniMax-M2.1: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Vision	1164	—
GeoBench	52%	—

Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Non-English	1334	1378
LMArena Chinese	1346	1430
LMArena French	1368	1404
LMArena German	1362	1381
LMArena Japanese	1287	1287
LMArena Korean	1308	1298
LMArena Russian	1349	1387
LMArena Spanish	1349	1397

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160), MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Instruction Following	1321	1400
LiveBench Instruction Following	74.9%	—

Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Longer Query	1333	1416
Fiction.LiveBench	33.3%	—

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads

Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Gemma 3 27B	MiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Text	1358	1392
LMArena Creative Writing	1346	1361
LMArena Multi-Turn	1345	1396
Short-Story Creative Writing	79.9%	—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1266	—
LiveBench Language	34.6%	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 3 27B better than MiniMax-M2.1?

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 27B or MiniMax-M2.1?

Gemma 3 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.16 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.1 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

Is Gemma 3 27B or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.1 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and MiniMax-M2.1 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.