Model comparison

Granite 4.2 30b vs MiniMax-M2.5

Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Granite 4.2 30b IBM

41.8

Rank #130 Confirmed

MiniMax-M2.5 MiniMax

38.3

Rank #188 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.2 30b scores higher in 3 categories and MiniMax-M2.5 in 4 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Granite 4.2 30b leads 27.8 to 17.5.

Side by side

Granite 4.2 30b and MiniMax-M2.5 specifications
Granite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
ProviderIBMMiniMax
Noometry Index41.838.3
Released—2026-02-12
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—205K
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.30
Output $ / M tokens—$1.20
Results tracked1133

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.5 leads

Granite 4.2 30b: 41.0 (#126), MiniMax-M2.5: 48.1 (#58)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Coding13961381
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—75.8%
LMArena WebDev—1387
SWE-bench Multilingual—68.3%
ALE-Bench—618.17

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 4.2 30b: —, MiniMax-M2.5: 30.4 (#77)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
Terminal-Bench—42.7%
Vending-Bench 2—-23.16

Reasoning Granite 4.2 30b leads

Granite 4.2 30b: 27.8 (#112), MiniMax-M2.5: 17.5 (#292)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Hard Prompts13741372
ARC-AGI-2—4.9%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—55.2%
NYT Connections (extended)—16.8%
ARC-AGI-1—63.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index—146.68

Math Not comparable

Granite 4.2 30b: —, MiniMax-M2.5: 26.9 (#253)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
ProofBench—4%
LMArena Math—1378

Knowledge Too close to call

Granite 4.2 30b: 39.1 (#138), MiniMax-M2.5: 39.2 (#135)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Expert14061379
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.1%

Multilingual Too close to call

Granite 4.2 30b: 47.3 (#151), MiniMax-M2.5: 47.1 (#152)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Non-English13401338
LMArena Chinese14141393
LMArena Russian13431358
LMArena French—1362
LMArena German—1362
LMArena Japanese—1171
LMArena Korean—1232
LMArena Spanish—1354

Instruction Following Too close to call

Granite 4.2 30b: 71.2 (#155), MiniMax-M2.5: 71.5 (#148)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Instruction Following13471353

Long Context Granite 4.2 30b leads

Granite 4.2 30b: 41.4 (#140), MiniMax-M2.5: 37.5 (#216)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Longer Query13591366
CL-bench—11.4%
CL-bench Life—6.3%

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Granite 4.2 30b: 53.8 (#156), MiniMax-M2.5: 53.9 (#153)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 30bMiniMax-M2.5
LMArena Text13611359
LMArena Creative Writing12881331
LMArena Multi-Turn13391364
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1361

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 4.2 30b better than MiniMax-M2.5?

Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 38.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 4.2 30b or MiniMax-M2.5 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.1 versus 41.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 4.2 30b and MiniMax-M2.5 share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.2 30b has 11 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.5 has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper