Model comparison

MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.5 27B

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 12, 2026. 17 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax M1

MiniMax

40.3

Rank #150 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 27B

Alibaba (Qwen)

41.9

Rank #127 Confirmed

Summary

They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax M1 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5 27B in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 59.3 to 53.1.
Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.55 / $2.20 for MiniMax M1.
MiniMax M1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.

Side by side

MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 27B specifications
	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
Provider	MiniMax	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	40.3	41.9
Released	2025-06-13	2026-02-23
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	1M	262K
Max output	40K	66K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.55	$0.30
Output $ / M tokens	$2.20	$2.40
Results tracked	18	28

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax M1 leads

MiniMax M1: 39.9 (#153), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Coding	1359	1427
LMArena WebDev	—	1358
WeirdML	—	39.5%
ALE-Bench	—	349.45

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax M1: —, Qwen3.5 27B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
Vending-Bench 2	—	201.98

Reasoning Too close to call

MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Hard Prompts	1339	1414
NYT Connections (extended)	—	47.9%
Thematic Generalization	—	45.5%
DTBench	—	82.4%
LMCA	—	34%

Math Qwen3.5 27B leads

MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Math	1361	1429
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions	—	56.7%

Knowledge Qwen3.5 27B leads

MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Expert	1317	1428
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	12.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiniMax M1: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Vision	—	1241

Multilingual Qwen3.5 27B leads

MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163), Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Non-English	1319	1390
LMArena Chinese	1360	1478
LMArena French	1370	1410
LMArena German	1350	1393
LMArena Japanese	1217	1345
LMArena Korean	1266	1358
LMArena Russian	1329	1390
LMArena Spanish	1353	1407

Instruction Following Qwen3.5 27B leads

MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174), Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Instruction Following	1312	1393

Long Context Qwen3.5 27B leads

MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141), Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Longer Query	1326	1413
Fiction.LiveBench	69.4%	—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 27B leads

MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161), Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5 27B
LMArena Text	1343	1409
LMArena Creative Writing	1298	1362
LMArena Multi-Turn	1335	1410

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; MiniMax M1 lists at $0.55 and $2.20.

Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?

MiniMax M1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax M1 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 27B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.