# GLM-4.6V vs MiniMax-M2.1

> GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6v-vs-minimax-m2-1
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 2 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.6V leads 26.5 to 15.8.
- GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.1.
- MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 38.4 |
| Rank | 133 | 177 |
| Context | 128K | 205K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1421 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1384 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 623.83 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6V: —
- MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 36.6% |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1410 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 11.2% |

## Math

- GLM-4.6V: —
- MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1396 |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1432 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.8% |

## Multimodal

- GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83)
- MiniMax-M2.1: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1378 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1430 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1386 |
| LMArena French | — | 1405 |
| LMArena German | — | 1380 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1396 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1399 |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1416 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1392 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1362 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1396 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6V better than MiniMax-M2.1?

GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or MiniMax-M2.1?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.1 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

### Is GLM-4.6V or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (40.2 vs 40.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.1 does, with 205K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and MiniMax-M2.1 share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.