# GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M2.1

> GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.1 costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-3-vs-minimax-m2-1
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3 scores higher in 9 categories and MiniMax-M2.1 in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5.3 leads 46.1 to 16.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 74.2% for GLM-5.3 and 11.2% for MiniMax-M2.1.
- MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.3.
- GLM-5.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 54.8 | 38.9 |
| Rank | 26 | 178 |
| Context | 1M | 205K |
| Input $/M | $1.40 | $0.30 |
| Output $/M | $4.40 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-5.3: 59.5 (#14)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1622 | 1384 |
| LMArena Coding | 1496 | 1421 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,317 | 623.83 |
| DeepSWE | 69% | — |
| FrontierCode | 40.1% | — |
| CursorBench | 42.6% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 30.2% | — |
| SciCode | 59% | — |
| WeirdML | 75.4% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5.3: 36.4 (#38)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 36.6% |
| APEX-Agents | 56.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 8,164 | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-5.3: 46.1 (#46)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.2% | 11.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1489 | 1411 |
| CritPt | 19.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 21% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 33% | — |
| DTBench | 87.7% | — |
| LMCA | 55.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.15 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.61 | — |

## Math

- GLM-5.3: 62.3 (#33)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1489 | 1397 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 68.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 29.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 91.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 49% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5.3: 58.3 (#37)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1516 | 1431 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.8% |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5.3: 55.7 (#28)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1457 | 1378 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1528 | 1430 |
| LMArena French | 1499 | 1404 |
| LMArena German | 1499 | 1381 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1453 | 1287 |
| LMArena Korean | 1472 | 1298 |
| LMArena Russian | 1463 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | 1397 |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5.3: 77.5 (#23)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1477 | 1400 |

## Long Context

- GLM-5.3: 45.4 (#41)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | 1416 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5.3: 75.7 (#6)
- MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3 | MiniMax-M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1471 | 1392 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1457 | 1361 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | 1396 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2075 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5.3 better than MiniMax-M2.1?

GLM-5.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M2.1 costs 4.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3 or MiniMax-M2.1?

MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GLM-5.3 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.

### Is GLM-5.3 or MiniMax-M2.1 better for coding?

GLM-5.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.5 versus 40.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5.3 does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-5.3 and MiniMax-M2.1 share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3 has 42 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M2.1 has 22.