Model comparison
MiniMax M1 vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct
MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where MiniMax M1 leads 34.8 to 15.3.
- MiniMax M1 is cheaper at $0.40 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- MiniMax M1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.7 | 29.7 |
| Released | 2025-06-13 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 131K |
| Max output | 40K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 7 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 39.2 (#149), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.1 (#165)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1359 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |
Reasoning MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 25.8 (#125), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 18.5 (#262)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |
Math MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 34.8 (#152), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 15.3 (#289)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1360 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 35.7 (#168), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#259)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 46.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1316 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiniMax M1: 46.0 (#157), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1320 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1361 | — |
| LMArena French | 1369 | — |
| LMArena German | 1350 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1220 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1263 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1330 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1354 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiniMax M1: 69.5 (#169), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1312 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#136), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 69.4% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1326 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
MiniMax M1: 53.3 (#155), Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1343 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1298 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1335 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M1 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?
MiniMax M1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?
MiniMax M1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.2 versus 38.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax M1 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.