Model comparison

MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 11, 2026. 17 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax M1

MiniMax

40.3

Rank #150 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash

Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax M1 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 43.2 to 36.4.
Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.55 / $2.20 for MiniMax M1.
MiniMax M1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
Provider	MiniMax	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	40.3	42.5
Released	2025-06-13	2026-02-23
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	1M	1M
Max output	40K	66K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.55	$0.10
Output $ / M tokens	$2.20	$0.40
Results tracked	18	32

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-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding	1359	1412
LMArena WebDev	—	1244
ALE-Bench	—	221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax M1: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2	—	462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts	1339	1403
Chess Puzzles	—	21%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	20%
DTBench	—	82.9%
LMCA	—	29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	143.98

Math Too close to call

MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math	1361	1407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	—	6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)	—	0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Expert	1317	1407
GPQA Diamond	—	82.3%
SimpleQA Verified	—	20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	10.5%

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English	1319	1385
LMArena Chinese	1360	1446
LMArena French	1370	1412
LMArena German	1350	1390
LMArena Japanese	1217	1368
LMArena Korean	1266	1344
LMArena Russian	1329	1379
LMArena Spanish	1353	1400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following	1312	1374

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query	1326	1392
Fiction.LiveBench	69.4%	—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	MiniMax M1	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text	1343	1397
LMArena Creative Writing	1298	1343
LMArena Multi-Turn	1335	1393

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; MiniMax M1 lists at $0.55 and $2.20.

Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

MiniMax M1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.