Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs MiniMax-M2.7
MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 32.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 2 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 59.1 to 34.3.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 32.6 | 37.4 |
| Released | — | 2026-03-18 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 205K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 30 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 32.9 (#255), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.4 (#115)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1454 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1397 |
| SciCode | — | 47% |
| WeirdML | — | 37% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 599.25 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#103)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 45.1% |
| ExploitBench | — | 13.3% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 21.0 (#206), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.0 (#248)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1422 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 24.7% |
| CritPt | — | 0.6% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 39.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 145.84 |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.6 (#206), MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#254)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1420 |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.3 (#223), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1443 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.9% |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.2 (#264), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1138 | 1439 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1383 |
| LMArena French | — | 1422 |
| LMArena German | — | 1398 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1261 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1403 |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 58.0 (#259), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.2 (#101)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1404 |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#239), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#94)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1419 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.3 (#269), MiniMax-M2.7: 59.1 (#107)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1404 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1354 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1413 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than MiniMax-M2.7?
MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 32.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and MiniMax-M2.7 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.