# MiniMax-M2.1 vs Qwen Plus

> MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-1-vs-qwen-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen Plus in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiniMax-M2.1 leads 35.6 to 22.0.
- MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
- Qwen Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
- MiniMax-M2.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.4 | 36.7 |
| Rank | 177 | 204 |
| Context | 205K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | $1.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132)
- Qwen Plus: 38.3 (#163)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1421 | 1328 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1384 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 623.83 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

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

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

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301)
- Qwen Plus: 27.6 (#101)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1410 | 1317 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 63.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 11.2% | — |
| DTBench | — | 81.1% |
| LMCA | — | 24% |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142)
- Qwen Plus: 22.0 (#266)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1326 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 17.8% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 65.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143)
- Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#245)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1432 | 1328 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 48.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123)
- Qwen Plus: 45.3 (#170)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1378 | 1310 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1430 | 1347 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | 1251 |
| LMArena Russian | 1386 | 1323 |
| LMArena French | 1405 | — |
| LMArena German | 1380 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108)
- Qwen Plus: 69.0 (#176)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1399 | 1303 |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98)
- Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#153)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | 1325 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114)
- Qwen Plus: 52.4 (#171)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1392 | 1326 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1362 | 1293 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1336 |

## FAQ

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

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

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

MiniMax-M2.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

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

MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 38.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Plus does, with 1M tokens against 205K.

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

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.