Model comparison
MiniMax-M2.1 vs Mistral Nemo
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Mistral AISummary
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 58.5 to 28.6.
- Mistral Nemo is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.1.
- MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 38.4 | 25.9 |
| Released | 2025-12-23 | 2024-07-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 205K | 128K |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1384 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1421 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 623.83 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91), Mistral Nemo: 23.3 (#118)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 36.6% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 27.6% |
| BALROG | — | 17.6% |
Reasoning Mistral Nemo leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301), Mistral Nemo: 19.9 (#230)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 11.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1410 | — |
| DTBench | — | 48.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.63 |
| PIQA | — | 83.5% |
Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142), Mistral Nemo: 23.5 (#263)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 10.8% |
| GSM8K | — | 84.2% |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143), Mistral Nemo: 12.3 (#293)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 29.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1432 | — |
| BoolQ | — | 82.5% |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1378 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1430 | — |
| LMArena French | 1405 | — |
| LMArena German | 1380 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1386 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1399 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114), Mistral Nemo: 28.6 (#291)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1362 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 881 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Mistral Nemo?
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.1 or Mistral Nemo?
Mistral Nemo is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.1 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax-M2.1 does, with 205K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Mistral Nemo share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Nemo has 10.