# MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen1.5-7B

> MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-5-vs-qwen1-5-7b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2.5 leads 53.9 to 29.6.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 38.3 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 188 | 273 |
| Context | 205K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | — |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2.5: 48.1 (#58)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1381 | 1107 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 75.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1387 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 68.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 618.17 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiniMax-M2.5: 30.4 (#77)
- Qwen1.5-7B: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 42.7% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | -23.16 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2.5: 17.5 (#292)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1372 | 1065 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 55.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 16.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 63.7% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.68 | — |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2.5: 26.9 (#253)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1378 | 1080 |
| ProofBench | 4% | — |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2.5: 39.2 (#135)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1379 | 1055 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.1% | — |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2.5: 47.1 (#152)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1338 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1393 | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | 1358 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1362 | — |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1171 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1232 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1354 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2.5: 71.5 (#148)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1353 | 1058 |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2.5: 37.5 (#216)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1366 | 1090 |
| CL-bench | 11.4% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2.5: 53.9 (#153)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1359 | 1083 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1331 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1364 | 1062 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1361 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiniMax-M2.5 better than Qwen1.5-7B?

MiniMax-M2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiniMax-M2.5 or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

MiniMax-M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.1 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.5 and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.5 has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.