Model comparison
MiniMax-M2.1 vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 58.5 to 23.9.
Side by side
| MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.4 | 28.3 |
| Released | 2025-12-23 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 205K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 22 | 13 |
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), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 28.6 (#305)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1421 | 999 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1384 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 623.83 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 36.6% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 17.7 (#277)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1410 | 976 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 11.2% | — |
Math MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 27.9 (#233)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1026 |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.2 (#252)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1432 | 980 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.2 (#285)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1378 | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1430 | 1024 |
| LMArena German | 1380 | 902 |
| LMArena Russian | 1386 | 952 |
| LMArena French | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | — |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.3 (#295)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1399 | 979 |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#285)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 988 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.1 leads
MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.9 (#304)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1392 | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1362 | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 977 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?
MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.