Model comparison

MiniMax-M3 vs Qwen1.5-32B

MiniMax-M3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M3 MiniMax

43.8

Rank #85 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.5

Rank #293 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M3 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiniMax-M3 leads 58.4 to 13.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 90.9% for MiniMax-M3 and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.

Side by side

MiniMax-M3 and Qwen1.5-32B specifications
MiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
ProviderMiniMaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.830.5
Released2026-06-012024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output512K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$1.20—
Results tracked4121

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

Category by category

Coding MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 41.8 (#118), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Coding14691155
FrontierCode14.7%—
LMArena WebDev1482—
SciCode47.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
BigCodeBench Complete—42%
ALE-Bench640.02—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M3: 22.6 (#130), Qwen1.5-32B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
APEX-Agents37.7%—
OSWorld 2.04.6%—
GBAEval0.9%—
Vending-Bench 22,158—

Reasoning MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 30.1 (#87), Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14471130
SimpleBench45.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)65.1%—
CritPt3.7%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
Mystery Game Puzzles8%—
DTBench78.9%—
LMCA33.7%—
Surface Evolver Bench55%—
Epoch Capabilities Index146.95—
ForecastBench61.4—

Math MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 40.0 (#95), Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math14291155
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202571.1%—
ProofBench18%—

Knowledge MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 58.4 (#35), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond90.9%30.7%
LMArena Expert14611126
MMLU—74.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiniMax-M3: 40.2 (#51), Qwen1.5-32B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Vision1253—
LMArena Document1435—

Multilingual MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 53.0 (#75), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English14201106
LMArena Chinese14631177
LMArena French14471101
LMArena German14261058
LMArena Japanese13811027
LMArena Korean13721008
LMArena Russian14281073
LMArena Spanish14321089

Instruction Following MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 75.5 (#62), Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14331116

Long Context MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 44.2 (#72), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query14451146

Writing & Preference MiniMax-M3 leads

MiniMax-M3: 62.1 (#83), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M3Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text14331137
LMArena Creative Writing14041083
LMArena Multi-Turn14421140
EQ-Bench 41150—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M3 better than Qwen1.5-32B?

MiniMax-M3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is MiniMax-M3 or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

MiniMax-M3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M3 and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M3 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper