Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs MiniMax-M2.1
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 2 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.6V leads 27.6 to 16.6.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.1.
- MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 38.9 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2025-12-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 205K |
| Max output | 33K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1421 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1384 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 623.83 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 36.6% |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1411 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 11.2% |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1397 |
Knowledge Too close to call
GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1371 | 1431 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.8% |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), MiniMax-M2.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1378 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1425 | 1430 |
| LMArena Russian | 1340 | 1387 |
| LMArena French | — | 1404 |
| LMArena German | — | 1381 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1298 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1397 |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1400 |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1416 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1392 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1361 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1360 | 1396 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than MiniMax-M2.1?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or MiniMax-M2.1?
GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.1 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.
Is GLM-4.6V or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (40.9 vs 40.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax-M2.1 does, with 205K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and MiniMax-M2.1 share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.