# Gemma 2B vs MiniMax-M2.7

> MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2b-vs-minimax-m2-7
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 1 category and MiniMax-M2.7 in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.7 leads 58.9 to 24.0.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 29.6 | 37.7 |
| Rank | 307 | 196 |
| Context | — | 205K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | — | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305)
- MiniMax-M2.7: 41.8 (#120)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1454 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1398 |
| SciCode | — | 47% |
| WeirdML | — | 37% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 599.25 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 2B: —
- MiniMax-M2.7: 25.1 (#111)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 45.1% |
| ExploitBench | — | 13.3% |
| GBAEval | — | 0% |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275)
- MiniMax-M2.7: 19.7 (#253)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1422 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 94.2 | 145.85 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 24.7% |
| CritPt | — | 0.6% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 39.3% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239)
- MiniMax-M2.7: 25.9 (#263)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | 1420 |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2B: —
- MiniMax-M2.7: 37.7 (#152)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1444 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294)
- MiniMax-M2.7: 50.3 (#123)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | 1441 |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | 1383 |
| LMArena French | — | 1421 |
| LMArena German | — | 1398 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1403 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302)
- MiniMax-M2.7: 74.1 (#103)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 970 | 1405 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291)
- MiniMax-M2.7: 43.3 (#99)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1419 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308)
- MiniMax-M2.7: 58.9 (#112)

| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1405 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 987 | 1354 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1412 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2B better than MiniMax-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.7 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 2B or MiniMax-M2.7 better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and MiniMax-M2.7 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.7 has 30.