Model comparison

MiniMax-M2 vs Qwen2-72B

MiniMax-M2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2 MiniMax

37.4

Rank #204 Confirmed

Qwen2-72B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #300 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2-72B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M2 leads 37.0 to 21.2.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2 and Qwen2-72B specifications
MiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
ProviderMiniMaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.430.0
Released2025-10-272024-06-07
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$1.20—
Results tracked2126

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 39.3 (#159), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Coding13701196
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)61%—
LMArena WebDev1297—
WeirdML—11.3%
BigCodeBench Instruct—38.5%
BigCodeBench Complete—54%

Agentic & Tool Use MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 25.1 (#109), Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
Terminal-Bench30%—
TheAgentCompany—1.1%
METR Time Horizons—29.9%
Vending-Bench 2160.6—

Reasoning Qwen2-72B leads

MiniMax-M2: 19.4 (#258), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Hard Prompts13571191
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)14.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—125.28

Math MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 37.3 (#160), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Math13521235
MATH Level 5—39.1%

Knowledge MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 37.0 (#163), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Expert13371171
GPQA Diamond—40.8%
MMLU—82.4%

Multilingual MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 45.3 (#171), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Non-English13131176
LMArena Chinese13661240
LMArena French13351170
LMArena German13551151
LMArena Russian13311169
LMArena Spanish13261169
LMArena Japanese—1111
LMArena Korean—1083

Instruction Following MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 70.2 (#166), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Instruction Following13281181

Long Context MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#153), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Longer Query13311192

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M2 leads

MiniMax-M2: 53.0 (#162), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2Qwen2-72B
LMArena Text13401203
LMArena Creative Writing12861181
LMArena Multi-Turn13611196

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2 better than Qwen2-72B?

MiniMax-M2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is MiniMax-M2 or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

MiniMax-M2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.3 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2 and Qwen2-72B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper