Model comparison

MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2.5 MiniMax

38.1

Rank #181 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

28.6

Rank #314 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2.5 leads 38.6 to 17.0.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.5.
  • MiniMax-M2.5 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2.5 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct specifications
MiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
ProviderMiniMaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.128.6
Released2026-02-122024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K131K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$0.17
Output $ / M tokens$1.20$0.70
Results tracked3315

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 47.9 (#53), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.8%—
LMArena WebDev1386—
SWE-bench Multilingual68.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1380—
BigCodeBench Complete—46.1%
ALE-Bench618.17—

Agentic & Tool Use MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 30.2 (#70), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Terminal-Bench42.7%—
BALROG—7.8%
Vending-Bench 2-23.16—

Reasoning MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 17.6 (#281), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Epoch Capabilities Index146.68118.44
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark55.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)16.8%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1372—
DTBench—47.7%
LMCA—6.4%

Math MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 25.8 (#242), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—2.5%
ProofBench4%—
Omni-MATH—29.4%
LMArena Math1378—

Knowledge MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 38.6 (#132), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond—35.5%
MMLU-Pro—53.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.1%—
GPQA (HELM)—34.1%
LMArena Expert1378—
MMLU—72.9%

Multilingual Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 47.3 (#147), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1338—
LMArena Chinese1392—
LMArena French1363—
LMArena German1361—
LMArena Japanese1169—
LMArena Korean1232—
LMArena Russian1359—
LMArena Spanish1354—

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 71.7 (#143), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval—74.1%
LMArena Instruction Following1353—

Long Context Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.5: 37.4 (#211), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
CL-bench11.4%—
CL-bench Life6.3%—
LMArena Longer Query1367—

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.5 leads

MiniMax-M2.5: 54.1 (#149), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.5Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Text1359—
LMArena Creative Writing1331—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1361—
WildBench—73.1%
LMArena Multi-Turn1364—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2.5 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.5 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.5 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

Is MiniMax-M2.5 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.9 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.5 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.5 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.5 has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper