Model comparison

MiniMax-M2.5 vs phi-3-medium 14B

MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.3 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2.5 MiniMax

38.3

Rank #188 Confirmed

phi-3-medium 14B Microsoft

29.7

Rank #306 Reported

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher in 2 categories and phi-3-medium 14B in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2.5 leads 39.2 to 9.1.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2.5 and phi-3-medium 14B specifications
MiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
ProviderMiniMaxMicrosoft
Noometry Index38.329.7
Released2026-02-122024-04-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$1.20—
Results tracked3313

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 48.1 (#58), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.8 (#201)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.8%—
LMArena WebDev1387—
SWE-bench Multilingual68.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1381—
BigCodeBench Complete—48.7%
ALE-Bench618.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 30.4 (#77), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
Terminal-Bench42.7%—
Vending-Bench 2-23.16—

Reasoning Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 17.5 (#292), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
Epoch Capabilities Index146.68121.23
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark55.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)16.8%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1372—
Adversarial NLI—55.8%
BIG-Bench Hard—81.4%
HellaSwag—82.4%
WinoGrande—81.5%

Math Too close to call

MiniMax-M2.5: 26.9 (#253), phi-3-medium 14B: 27.3 (#250)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
ProofBench4%—
LMArena Math1378—
MATH Level 5—17.6%

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 39.2 (#135), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#306)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
GPQA Diamond—27.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.1%—
LMArena Expert1379—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—91.6%
MMLU—78%
OpenBookQA—87.4%
TriviaQA—73.9%

Multilingual Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 47.1 (#152), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Non-English1338—
LMArena Chinese1393—
LMArena French1362—
LMArena German1362—
LMArena Japanese1171—
LMArena Korean1232—
LMArena Russian1358—
LMArena Spanish1354—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 71.5 (#148), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1353—

Long Context Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 37.5 (#216), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
CL-bench11.4%—
CL-bench Life6.3%—
LMArena Longer Query1366—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 53.9 (#153), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Text1359—
LMArena Creative Writing1331—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1361—
LMArena Multi-Turn1364—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2.5 better than phi-3-medium 14B?

MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.3 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is MiniMax-M2.5 or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.1 versus 36.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.5 and phi-3-medium 14B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.5 has 33 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper