Model comparison
MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads 36.1 to 25.9.
- MiniMax-M2.7 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.7 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 30 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1314 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1398 | — |
| SciCode | 47% | — |
| WeirdML | 37% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 599.25 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 45.1% | — |
| ExploitBench | 13.3% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1299 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 24.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 39.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.85 | — |
Math Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1420 | 1298 |
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1444 | 1289 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.9% | — |
Multilingual MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1382 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1398 | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1262 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1383 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1421 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1403 | — |
Instruction Following MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1275 |
Long Context MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2.7 leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1405 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1354 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1412 | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax-M2.7 better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiniMax-M2.7 or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.7 and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.7 has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.