Model comparison

MiniMax-M2 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

MiniMax-M2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.4 vs 37.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2 MiniMax

37.4

Rank #204 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2 scores higher in 7 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where MiniMax-M2 leads 45.3 to 38.1.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think specifications
MiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderMiniMaxAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index37.437.9
Released2025-10-27—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$1.20—
Results tracked2115

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 39.3 (#159), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding13701291
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)61%—
LMArena WebDev1297—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2: 25.1 (#109), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
Terminal-Bench30%—
Vending-Bench 2160.6—

Reasoning Olmo 3.1 32b Think leads

MiniMax-M2: 19.4 (#258), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts13571272
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)14.8%—

Math MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 37.3 (#160), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Math13521305

Knowledge MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 37.0 (#163), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert13371295

Multilingual MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 45.3 (#171), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English13131209
LMArena Chinese13661242
LMArena French13351260
LMArena German13551262
LMArena Russian13311193
LMArena Spanish13261289

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 70.2 (#166), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following13281247

Long Context MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#153), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query13311272

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 53.0 (#162), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text13401272
LMArena Creative Writing12861226
LMArena Multi-Turn13611252

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

MiniMax-M2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.4 vs 37.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Is MiniMax-M2 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

MiniMax-M2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.3 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper