# MiniMax-M2.1 vs Pixtral Large

> MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-1-vs-pixtral-large
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 58.3 to 32.9.
- MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Pixtral Large.
- MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 38.9 | 32.2 |
| Rank | 178 | 259 |
| Context | 205K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $2 |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | $6 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2.1: 40.4 (#143)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1384 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1421 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 623.83 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiniMax-M2.1: 27.9 (#98)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 36.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2.1: 16.6 (#302)
- Pixtral Large: 21.7 (#218)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 11.2% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1411 | — |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#138)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1397 | — |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2.1: 38.3 (#147)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1431 | — |

## Multimodal

- MiniMax-M2.1: —
- Pixtral Large: 30.6 (#111)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1089 |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2.1: 50.0 (#128)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1378 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1430 | — |
| LMArena French | 1404 | — |
| LMArena German | 1381 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1298 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1397 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2.1: 73.8 (#112)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | — |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#101)
- Pixtral Large: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2.1: 58.3 (#120)
- Pixtral Large: 32.9 (#278)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Pixtral Large |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1361 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 988 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Pixtral Large?

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 32.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.1 or Pixtral Large?

MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Pixtral Large lists at $2 and $6.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

### How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Pixtral Large share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Pixtral Large has 3.