# MiniMax-M2.1 vs Qwen3 Coder Next

> MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-1-vs-qwen3-coder-next
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3 Coder Next leads 21.7 to 15.8.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.1.
- Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 205K.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.4 | 33.8 |
| Rank | 177 | 229 |
| Context | 205K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.12 |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | $0.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: 35.8 (#206)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1384 | — |
| SciCode | — | 32.3% |
| WeirdML | — | 34.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1421 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 623.83 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 36.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: 21.7 (#191)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 11.2% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1410 | — |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | — |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1432 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1378 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1430 | — |
| LMArena French | 1405 | — |
| LMArena German | 1380 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1297 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1386 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1396 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1399 | — |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1416 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114)
- Qwen3 Coder Next: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Qwen3 Coder Next?

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiniMax-M2.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen3 Coder Next?

Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.1 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

### Is MiniMax-M2.1 or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 205K.

### How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Qwen3 Coder Next share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.