# Llama 3.2 1B vs MiniMax M1

> MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.3 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax M1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-1b-vs-minimax-m1
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and MiniMax M1 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax M1 leads 53.1 to 21.3.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.55 / $2.20 for MiniMax M1.
- MiniMax M1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 60K.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 40.3 |
| Rank | 354 | 150 |
| Context | 60K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.027 | $0.55 |
| Output $/M | $0.20 | $2.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)
- MiniMax M1: 39.9 (#153)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | 1359 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)
- MiniMax M1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)
- MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1339 |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | — |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)
- MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1361 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)
- MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | 1317 |
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)
- MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1319 |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | 1360 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | 1350 |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | 1329 |
| LMArena French | — | 1370 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1217 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1266 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1353 |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)
- MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1312 |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)
- MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1326 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 69.4% |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)
- MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1343 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1298 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1335 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 1B better than MiniMax M1?

MiniMax M1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.3 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax M1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or MiniMax M1?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; MiniMax M1 lists at $0.55 and $2.20.

### Is Llama 3.2 1B or MiniMax M1 better for coding?

MiniMax M1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.9 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax M1 does, with 1M tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and MiniMax M1 share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax M1 has 18.