Model comparison
MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3 Coder Next in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 41.8 to 36.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 47% for MiniMax-M2.7 and 32.3% for Qwen3 Coder Next.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.7.
- Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 205K.
Side by side
| MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.7 | 34.3 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2026-02-02 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 205K | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.12 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 30 | 3 |
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), Qwen3 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 47% | 32.3% |
| WeirdML | 37% | 34.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1398 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 599.25 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 45.1% | — |
| ExploitBench | 13.3% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3 Coder Next leads
MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0.6% | 0% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 24.7% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 39.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.85 | — |
Math Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1420 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1444 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1382 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | — |
| LMArena French | 1421 | — |
| LMArena German | 1398 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1262 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1383 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1403 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.7 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1354 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1412 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax-M2.7 better than Qwen3 Coder Next?
MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.7 or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.7 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.
Is MiniMax-M2.7 or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?
MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.7 and Qwen3 Coder Next share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.7 has 30 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.