Noometry

Model comparison

GPT-5.3 Chat vs MiniMax-M2.1

GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.1 costs 9.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.3 Chat OpenAI

42.8

Rank #109 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.1 MiniMax

38.9

Rank #178 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.3 Chat scores higher in 5 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-5.3 Chat leads 28.5 to 16.6.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.3 Chat.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
ProviderOpenAIMiniMax
Noometry Index42.838.9
Released2026-03-032025-12-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window128K205K
Max output16K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.75$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$14$1.20
Results tracked1822

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.3 Chat leads

GPT-5.3 Chat: 41.4 (#124), MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Coding14081421
LMArena WebDev—1384
ALE-Bench—623.83

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.3 Chat: —, MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
Terminal-Bench—36.6%

Reasoning GPT-5.3 Chat leads

GPT-5.3 Chat: 28.5 (#102), MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Hard Prompts13991411
NYT Connections (extended)—11.2%

Math Too close to call

GPT-5.3 Chat: 38.2 (#142), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Math13891397

Knowledge Too close to call

GPT-5.3 Chat: 38.8 (#140), MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Expert13971431
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.8%

Multilingual Too close to call

GPT-5.3 Chat: 50.3 (#124), MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Non-English13821378
LMArena Chinese14321430
LMArena French13971404
LMArena German13841381
LMArena Japanese13521287
LMArena Korean13461298
LMArena Russian14001387
LMArena Spanish13711397

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads

GPT-5.3 Chat: 72.8 (#129), MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Instruction Following13781400

Long Context Too close to call

GPT-5.3 Chat: 42.6 (#120), MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Longer Query13961416

Writing & Preference GPT-5.3 Chat leads

GPT-5.3 Chat: 63.1 (#68), MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)

BenchmarkGPT-5.3 ChatMiniMax-M2.1
LMArena Text13891392
LMArena Creative Writing13551361
LMArena Multi-Turn14121396
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1690—

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.3 Chat better than MiniMax-M2.1?

GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.1 costs 9.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.3 Chat or MiniMax-M2.1?

MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.3 Chat lists at $1.75 and $14.

Is GPT-5.3 Chat or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?

GPT-5.3 Chat scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 40.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.1 does, with 205K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.3 Chat and MiniMax-M2.1 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.3 Chat has 18 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper