Noometry

Model comparison

MiniMax-M2.7 vs Mistral Medium 3.1

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2.7 MiniMax

37.4

Rank #188 Confirmed

Mistral Medium 3.1 Mistral AI

31.5

Rank #260 Reported

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher in 2 categories and Mistral Medium 3.1 in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 19.0 to 10.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Thematic Generalization: 39.3% for MiniMax-M2.7 and 20.3% for Mistral Medium 3.1.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2 for Mistral Medium 3.1.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.
  • MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
ProviderMiniMaxMistral AI
Noometry Index37.431.5
Released2026-03-18—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window205K131K
Max output131K105K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$1.20$2
Results tracked303

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.7: 41.4 (#115), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena WebDev1397—
SciCode47%—
WeirdML37%—
LMArena Coding1454—
ALE-Bench599.25—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#103), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
Terminal-Bench45.1%—
ExploitBench13.3%—
GBAEval0%—

Reasoning MiniMax-M2.7 leads

MiniMax-M2.7: 19.0 (#248), Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.1 (#336)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
NYT Connections (extended)24.7%6.5%
Thematic Generalization39.3%20.3%
CritPt0.6%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1422—
Epoch Capabilities Index145.84—

Math Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#254), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
ProofBench3%—
LMArena Math1420—

Knowledge Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.7: 37.1 (#151), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.9%—
LMArena Expert1443—

Multilingual Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.7: 50.5 (#120), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Non-English1382—
LMArena Chinese1439—
LMArena French1422—
LMArena German1398—
LMArena Japanese1261—
LMArena Korean1313—
LMArena Russian1383—
LMArena Spanish1403—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.7: 74.2 (#101), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Instruction Following1404—

Long Context Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#94), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Longer Query1419—

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads

MiniMax-M2.7: 59.1 (#107), Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.6 (#140)

BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.7Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text1404—
LMArena Creative Writing1354—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1476
LMArena Multi-Turn1413—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2.7 better than Mistral Medium 3.1?

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.7 or Mistral Medium 3.1?

MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 lists at $0.40 and $2.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.7 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.7 and Mistral Medium 3.1 share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.7 has 30 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper