Model comparison
MiniMax-M2.7 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think
MiniMax-M2.7 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.4 vs 37.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher in 6 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 59.1 to 46.4.
Side by side
| MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 37.4 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 205K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 30 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 41.4 (#115), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.1 (#186)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1292 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1397 | — |
| SciCode | 47% | — |
| WeirdML | 37% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 599.25 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#103), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 45.1% | — |
| ExploitBench | 13.3% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 19.0 (#248), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 24.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1272 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 24.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 39.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.84 | — |
Math Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 24.9 (#254), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 33.6 (#170)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1420 | 1305 |
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 37.1 (#151), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1443 | 1294 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.9% | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 50.5 (#120), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1382 | 1210 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1439 | 1241 |
| LMArena French | 1422 | 1262 |
| LMArena German | 1398 | 1260 |
| LMArena Russian | 1383 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1403 | 1288 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1261 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | — |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 74.2 (#101), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1246 |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#94), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1272 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 59.1 (#107), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1404 | 1271 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1354 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1413 | 1252 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax-M2.7 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?
MiniMax-M2.7 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.4 vs 37.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is MiniMax-M2.7 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.7 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.7 has 30 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.