Model comparison
MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 36.4.
- MiniMax M1 is cheaper at $0.55 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
- MiniMax M1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
Side by side
| MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.3 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2025-06-13 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 40K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.55 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
MiniMax M1: 39.9 (#153), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1359 | — |
Reasoning MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1339 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 78.1% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 146.5 |
Math Qwen3.6 27B leads
MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1361 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads
MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 85.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1317 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1319 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1360 | — |
| LMArena French | 1370 | — |
| LMArena German | 1350 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1217 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1266 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1329 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1353 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1312 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 69.4% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1326 | — |
Writing & Preference MiniMax M1 leads
MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | MiniMax M1 | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1343 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1298 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1335 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Qwen3.6 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.6 27B?
MiniMax M1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.55 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.
Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (39.9 vs 39.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax M1 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.6 27B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.