Noometry

Model comparison

MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax M1 MiniMax

40.3

Rank #150 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax M1 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 36.4.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 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 M1Qwen3.7 Plus
ProviderMiniMaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.345.3
Released2025-06-132026-06-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output40K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.55$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$2.20$1.60
Results tracked1832

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax M1 leads

MiniMax M1: 39.9 (#153), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding13591473
FrontierCode—10.2%
SciCode—45.5%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax M1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts13391460
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LMCA—37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.37

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math13611466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Expert13171467
GPQA Diamond—87.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiniMax M1: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English13191445
LMArena Chinese13601510
LMArena French13701473
LMArena German13501471
LMArena Japanese12171413
LMArena Korean12661415
LMArena Russian13291457
LMArena Spanish13531457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following13121440

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query13261455
Fiction.LiveBench69.4%—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text13431455
LMArena Creative Writing12981439
LMArena Multi-Turn13351460

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; MiniMax M1 lists at $0.55 and $2.20.

Is MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

MiniMax M1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax M1 has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper