Noometry

Model comparison

GLM-4.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5 Z.ai (Zhipu)

42.0

Rank #122 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.7

Rank #196 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5 scores higher in 3 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.5 leads 39.0 to 25.9.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.5.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

GLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)MiniMax
Noometry Index42.037.7
Released2025-07-272026-03-18
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K205K
Max output98K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$1.20
Results tracked2730

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

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 41.4 (#125), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
WeirdML40.6%37%
LMArena Coding14341454
ALE-Bench344.82599.25
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)54.2%—
LMArena WebDev—1398
SciCode—47%
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.5: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench—45.1%
ExploitBench—13.3%
GBAEval—0%

Reasoning GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 28.6 (#100), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Hard Prompts14291422
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)—24.7%
CritPt—0.6%
Thematic Generalization—39.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—145.85

Math GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 39.0 (#116), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Math14271420
ProofBench—3%

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads

GLM-4.5: 35.9 (#179), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Expert14331444
Humanity's Last Exam8.3%—
Confabulations11.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.9%

Multilingual GLM-4.5 leads

GLM-4.5: 52.8 (#77), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English14171382
LMArena Chinese14651441
LMArena French14181421
LMArena German14071398
LMArena Japanese14151262
LMArena Korean13801313
LMArena Russian14141383
LMArena Spanish14541403

Instruction Following Too close to call

GLM-4.5: 74.1 (#104), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following14041405

Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads

GLM-4.5: 38.2 (#201), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query14121419
Fiction.LiveBench58.3%—

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads

GLM-4.5: 57.5 (#127), MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

BenchmarkGLM-4.5MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text14301405
LMArena Creative Writing13951354
LMArena Multi-Turn14151412
Short-Story Creative Writing73.4%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1343—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5 better than MiniMax-M2.7?

GLM-4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.0 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5 or MiniMax-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

Is GLM-4.5 or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (41.4 vs 41.8); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.7 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5 and MiniMax-M2.7 share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5 has 27 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.

Related comparisons

Go deeper