Model comparison

MiniMax-M2 vs phi-3-medium 14B

MiniMax-M2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2 MiniMax

36.9

Rank #201 Confirmed

phi-3-medium 14B Microsoft

29.1

Rank #306 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2 leads 36.3 to 9.1.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2 and phi-3-medium 14B specifications
MiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
ProviderMiniMaxMicrosoft
Noometry Index36.929.1
Released2025-10-272024-04-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$1.20—
Results tracked2113

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 39.1 (#151), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.3 (#198)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)61%—
LMArena WebDev1297—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1370—
BigCodeBench Complete—48.7%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2: 24.9 (#102), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
Terminal-Bench30%—
Vending-Bench 2160.6—

Reasoning Not comparable

MiniMax-M2: 18.6 (#256), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)14.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1357—
Adversarial NLI—55.8%
BIG-Bench Hard—81.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—121.18
HellaSwag—82.4%
WinoGrande—81.5%

Math MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 34.6 (#158), phi-3-medium 14B: 25.2 (#249)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Math1350—
MATH Level 5—17.6%

Knowledge MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 36.3 (#160), phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#301)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
GPQA Diamond—27.6%
LMArena Expert1336—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—91.6%
MMLU—78%
OpenBookQA—87.4%
TriviaQA—73.9%

Multilingual Not comparable

MiniMax-M2: 45.6 (#165), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Non-English1314—
LMArena Chinese1367—
LMArena French1336—
LMArena German1366—
LMArena Russian1332—
LMArena Spanish1326—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiniMax-M2: 70.4 (#160), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1329—

Long Context Not comparable

MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#148), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Longer Query1332—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

MiniMax-M2: 53.3 (#157), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2phi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Text1340—
LMArena Creative Writing1288—
LMArena Multi-Turn1362—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2 better than phi-3-medium 14B?

MiniMax-M2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is MiniMax-M2 or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

MiniMax-M2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.1 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2 and phi-3-medium 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2 has 21 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper