Model comparison
MiniMax-M2 vs Qwen2.5-Max
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 36.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
MiniMax
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 24.6 to 18.6.
- MiniMax-M2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.9 | 40.1 |
| Released | 2025-10-27 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax-M2: 39.1 (#151), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1370 | 1359 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 61% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1297 | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiniMax-M2: 24.9 (#102), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 30% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 160.6 | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax-M2: 18.6 (#256), Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1357 | 1360 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 14.8% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.54 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math Too close to call
MiniMax-M2: 34.6 (#158), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1350 | 1369 |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge MiniMax-M2 leads
MiniMax-M2: 36.3 (#160), Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1336 | 1337 |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
Multilingual Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax-M2: 45.6 (#165), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1314 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1367 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1336 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1366 | 1350 |
| LMArena Russian | 1332 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1326 | 1377 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
Instruction Following Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax-M2: 70.4 (#160), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1329 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context Too close to call
MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#148), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1332 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5-Max leads
MiniMax-M2: 53.3 (#157), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1288 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1362 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax-M2 better than Qwen2.5-Max?
Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 36.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiniMax-M2 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2 and Qwen2.5-Max share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.