Model comparison
MiniMax M1 vs Qwen1.5-72B
MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 30.3 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 Qwen1.5-72B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax M1 leads 35.7 to 11.5.
Side by side
| MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.7 | 30.3 |
| Released | 2025-06-13 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 40K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.40 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 18 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 39.2 (#149), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.4 (#272)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1359 | 1166 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |
Reasoning MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 25.8 (#125), Qwen1.5-72B: 21.2 (#201)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | 1148 |
Math MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 34.8 (#152), Qwen1.5-72B: 30.7 (#205)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1360 | 1164 |
Knowledge MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 35.7 (#168), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#295)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1316 | 1136 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
Multilingual MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 46.0 (#157), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.4 (#248)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1320 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1361 | 1186 |
| LMArena French | 1369 | 1158 |
| LMArena German | 1350 | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1220 | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | 1263 | 1049 |
| LMArena Russian | 1330 | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1354 | 1110 |
Instruction Following MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 69.5 (#169), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.6 (#251)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1312 | 1142 |
Long Context MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#136), Qwen1.5-72B: 35.0 (#238)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1326 | 1157 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 69.4% | — |
Writing & Preference MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 53.3 (#155), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.4 (#253)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1343 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1298 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1335 | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen1.5-72B?
MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?
MiniMax M1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.2 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen1.5-72B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.