Noometry

Model comparison

MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen Max

MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.3 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2.5 MiniMax

38.3

Rank #188 Confirmed

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.7

Rank #230 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen Max in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where MiniMax-M2.5 leads 48.1 to 30.7.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 33K.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
ProviderMiniMaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.334.7
Released2026-02-122024-04-03
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K33K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$1.60
Output $ / M tokens$1.20$6.40
Results tracked3323

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), Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Coding13811288
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.8%—
Aider Polyglot—21.8%
LMArena WebDev1387—
SWE-bench Multilingual68.3%—
ALE-Bench618.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 30.4 (#77), Qwen Max: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
Terminal-Bench42.7%—
Vending-Bench 2-23.16—

Reasoning Qwen Max leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 17.5 (#292), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Hard Prompts13721269
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark55.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)16.8%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
Epoch Capabilities Index146.68—

Math MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 26.9 (#253), Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Math13781275
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—16.1%
ProofBench4%—
MATH Level 5—67.2%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—1%

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 39.2 (#135), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Expert13791248
GPQA Diamond—56.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.1%—

Multilingual MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 47.1 (#152), Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Non-English13381263
LMArena Chinese13931254
LMArena French13621330
LMArena German13621254
LMArena Japanese11711205
LMArena Korean12321142
LMArena Russian13581274
LMArena Spanish13541290

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 71.5 (#148), Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Instruction Following13531262

Long Context Qwen Max leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 37.5 (#216), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Longer Query13661288
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench11.4%—
CL-bench Life6.3%—

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 53.9 (#153), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen Max
LMArena Text13591282
LMArena Creative Writing13311248
LMArena Multi-Turn13641277
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1361—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2.5 better than Qwen Max?

MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.3 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.5 or Qwen Max?

MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

Is MiniMax-M2.5 or Qwen Max better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.1 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.5 does, with 205K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.5 and Qwen Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.5 has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper