Model comparison
Grok 4.3 vs MiniMax-M2.7
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.3 scores higher in 5 categories and MiniMax-M2.7 in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.3 leads 45.8 to 24.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 55.2% for Grok 4.3 and 24.7% for MiniMax-M2.7.
- MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.3.
- Grok 4.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
- MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 43.6 | 37.4 |
| Released | 2026-04-17 | 2026-03-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 205K |
| Max output | 30K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 40 | 30 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Grok 4.3: 41.3 (#117), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.4 (#115)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1357 | 1397 |
| SciCode | 47.3% | 47% |
| WeirdML | 49.9% | 37% |
| LMArena Coding | 1415 | 1454 |
| ALE-Bench | 944.17 | 599.25 |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 27.6 (#93), MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#103)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 45.1% |
| ExploitBench | — | 13.3% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |
| GDP.pdf | 8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1165 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 35.26 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 34.9 (#60), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.0 (#248)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 55.2% | 24.7% |
| CritPt | 8% | 0.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1397 | 1422 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.13 | 145.84 |
| Chess Puzzles | 25% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 39.3% |
| DTBench | 90.7% | — |
| LMCA | 38.3% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.3 | — |
Math Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 45.8 (#60), MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#254)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 11% | 3% |
| LMArena Math | 1388 | 1420 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 42.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 14.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads
Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#57), MiniMax-M2.7: 37.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1385 | 1443 |
| GPQA Diamond | 88.8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 33.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#96), MiniMax-M2.7: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1231 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 0% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Grok 4.3: 50.7 (#114), MiniMax-M2.7: 50.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1385 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1423 | 1439 |
| LMArena French | 1412 | 1422 |
| LMArena German | 1395 | 1398 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1379 | 1261 |
| LMArena Korean | 1357 | 1313 |
| LMArena Russian | 1399 | 1383 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1402 | 1403 |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads
Grok 4.3: 72.3 (#135), MiniMax-M2.7: 74.2 (#101)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1366 | 1404 |
Long Context Too close to call
Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#118), MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#94)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1393 | 1419 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Grok 4.3: 58.6 (#112), MiniMax-M2.7: 59.1 (#107)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.3 | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1397 | 1404 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1380 | 1354 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1406 | 1413 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1075 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.3 better than MiniMax-M2.7?
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 37.4 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.7 costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.3 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; Grok 4.3 lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is Grok 4.3 or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (41.3 vs 41.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.3 does, with 1M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.3 and MiniMax-M2.7 share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.3 has 40 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.