Model comparison
MiniMax M1 vs Qwen1.5-32B
MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.3 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax M1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax M1 leads 36.4 to 13.5.
Side by side
| MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.3 | 30.5 |
| Released | 2025-06-13 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 40K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.55 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 18 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 39.9 (#153), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1359 | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |
Reasoning MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1339 | 1130 |
Math MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1361 | 1155 |
Knowledge MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1317 | 1126 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |
Multilingual MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1319 | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1360 | 1177 |
| LMArena French | 1370 | 1101 |
| LMArena German | 1350 | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1217 | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | 1266 | 1008 |
| LMArena Russian | 1329 | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1353 | 1089 |
Instruction Following MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1312 | 1116 |
Long Context MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1326 | 1146 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 69.4% | — |
Writing & Preference MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1343 | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1298 | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1335 | 1140 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen1.5-32B?
MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.3 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?
MiniMax M1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen1.5-32B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.