# DeepSeek-V3.1 vs MiniMax-M2

> DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 36.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v3-1-vs-minimax-m2
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 16

## Summary

- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher in 7 categories and MiniMax-M2 in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek-V3.1 leads 27.3 to 18.6.
- DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper at $0.25 / $0.95 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.
- MiniMax-M2 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 164K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 42.2 | 36.9 |
| Rank | 106 | 201 |
| Context | 164K | 205K |
| Input $/M | $0.25 | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | $0.95 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 39.8 (#140)
- MiniMax-M2: 39.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1417 | 1370 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 61% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1297 |
| WeirdML | 38.4% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek-V3.1: —
- MiniMax-M2: 24.9 (#102)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 30% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 160.6 |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 27.3 (#109)
- MiniMax-M2: 18.6 (#256)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.2% | 57.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1417 | 1357 |
| SimpleBench | 40% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 14.8% |
| DTBench | 82.7% | — |
| LMCA | 24.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.92 | — |
| ForecastBench | 58 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.1 (#125)
- MiniMax-M2: 34.6 (#158)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1420 | 1350 |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 43.0 (#86)
- MiniMax-M2: 36.3 (#160)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1403 | 1336 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 51.8 (#100)
- MiniMax-M2: 45.6 (#165)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1400 | 1314 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | 1367 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1366 |
| LMArena Russian | 1405 | 1332 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1429 | 1326 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1374 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1337 | — |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 74.1 (#105)
- MiniMax-M2: 70.4 (#160)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1329 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.3 (#227)
- MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#148)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1332 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 52.8% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 60.5 (#93)
- MiniMax-M2: 53.3 (#157)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | MiniMax-M2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1420 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1362 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1436 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1 better than MiniMax-M2?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 36.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1 or MiniMax-M2?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.95 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1 or MiniMax-M2 better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (39.8 vs 39.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2 does, with 205K tokens against 164K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1 and MiniMax-M2 share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1 has 27 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2 has 21.