Model comparison

MiniMax-M2.1 vs Qwen Plus

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2.1 MiniMax

38.4

Rank #177 Confirmed

Qwen Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

36.7

Rank #204 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen Plus in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 35.6 to 22.0.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
  • Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
  • MiniMax-M2.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen Plus specifications
MiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
ProviderMiniMaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.436.7
Released2025-12-232024-01-25
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K1M
Max output131K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$1.20$1.20
Results tracked2220

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132), Qwen Plus: 38.3 (#163)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Coding14211328
LMArena WebDev1384—
ALE-Bench623.83—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91), Qwen Plus: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
Terminal-Bench36.6%—

Reasoning Qwen Plus leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301), Qwen Plus: 27.6 (#101)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts14101317
Kagi LLM Benchmark—63.3%
NYT Connections (extended)11.2%—
DTBench—81.1%
LMCA—24%

Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142), Qwen Plus: 22.0 (#266)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Math13961326
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—17.8%
MATH Level 5—65.3%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—1.7%

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#245)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Expert14321328
GPQA Diamond—48.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—

Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123), Qwen Plus: 45.3 (#170)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Non-English13781310
LMArena Chinese14301347
LMArena Japanese12871251
LMArena Russian13861323
LMArena French1405—
LMArena German1380—
LMArena Korean1297—
LMArena Spanish1396—

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108), Qwen Plus: 69.0 (#176)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Instruction Following13991303

Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#153)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Longer Query14161325

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114), Qwen Plus: 52.4 (#171)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Qwen Plus
LMArena Text13921326
LMArena Creative Writing13621293
LMArena Multi-Turn13961336

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Qwen Plus?

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen Plus?

MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

Is MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen Plus better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 38.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen Plus share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper