# MiniMax-M2.1 vs Qwen Max

> MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-1-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen Max in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 35.6 to 21.0.
- MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- MiniMax-M2.1 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 33K.
- MiniMax-M2.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.4 | 34.4 |
| Rank | 177 | 226 |
| Context | 205K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | $6.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#288)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1421 | 1288 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1384 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 623.83 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91)
- Qwen Max: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 36.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301)
- Qwen Max: 24.1 (#154)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1410 | 1270 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 11.2% | — |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142)
- Qwen Max: 21.0 (#272)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1275 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#222)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1432 | 1248 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123)
- Qwen Max: 42.0 (#197)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1378 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1430 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1405 | 1329 |
| LMArena German | 1380 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | 1297 | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | 1386 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108)
- Qwen Max: 66.7 (#203)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1399 | 1262 |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1289 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114)
- Qwen Max: 48.0 (#200)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1392 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1362 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1277 |

## FAQ

### Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Qwen Max?

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen Max?

MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

### Is MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen Max better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 30.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M2.1 does, with 205K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.