Model comparison

Mercury 2.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 7.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 4 shared benchmarks.

Mercury 2.5 Inception

33.5

Rank #242 Reported

MiniMax-M2.7

MiniMax

37.7

Rank #196 Confirmed

Summary

They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2.5 scores higher in 1 category and MiniMax-M2.7 in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 38.5% for Mercury 2.5 and 47% for MiniMax-M2.7.
Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.7.
Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 205K.
MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Mercury 2.5 and MiniMax-M2.7 specifications
	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
Provider	Inception	MiniMax
Noometry Index	33.5	37.7
Released	2026-09-08	2026-03-18
Weights	Proprietary	Open
Context window	260K	205K
Max output	66K	131K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.04	$0.30
Output $ / M tokens	$0.15	$1.20
Results tracked	4	30

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156), MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
SciCode	38.5%	47%
ALE-Bench	301.65	599.25
LMArena WebDev	—	1398
WeirdML	—	37%
LMArena Coding	—	1454

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
Terminal-Bench	—	45.1%
ExploitBench	—	13.3%
GBAEval	—	0%

Reasoning Mercury 2.5 leads

Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193), MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
CritPt	0%	0.6%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	24.7%
Thematic Generalization	—	39.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts	—	1422
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	145.85

Math MiniMax-M2.7 leads

Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272), MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
ProofBench	3%	3%
LMArena Math	—	1420

Knowledge Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	12.9%
LMArena Expert	—	1444

Multilingual Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Non-English	—	1382
LMArena Chinese	—	1441
LMArena French	—	1421
LMArena German	—	1398
LMArena Japanese	—	1262
LMArena Korean	—	1313
LMArena Russian	—	1383
LMArena Spanish	—	1403

Instruction Following Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Instruction Following	—	1405

Long Context Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Longer Query	—	1419

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Mercury 2.5	MiniMax-M2.7
LMArena Text	—	1405
LMArena Creative Writing	—	1354
LMArena Multi-Turn	—	1412

Frequently asked questions

Is Mercury 2.5 better than MiniMax-M2.7?

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or MiniMax-M2.7?

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.7 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

Is Mercury 2.5 or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and MiniMax-M2.7 share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 4 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.