# MiniMax-M2 vs Qwen1.5-110B

> MiniMax-M2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/minimax-m2-vs-qwen1-5-110b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiniMax-M2 leads 53.0 to 38.0.

## Snapshot

| | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.4 | 34.2 |
| Rank | 204 | 234 |
| Context | 205K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | — |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiniMax-M2: 39.3 (#159)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1370 | 1184 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 61% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1297 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiniMax-M2: 25.1 (#109)
- Qwen1.5-110B: —

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 30% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 160.6 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiniMax-M2: 19.4 (#258)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1357 | 1168 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 14.8% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |

## Math

- MiniMax-M2: 37.3 (#160)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1352 | 1185 |

## Knowledge

- MiniMax-M2: 37.0 (#163)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1337 | 1144 |

## Multilingual

- MiniMax-M2: 45.3 (#171)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1366 | 1206 |
| LMArena French | 1335 | 1151 |
| LMArena German | 1355 | 1123 |
| LMArena Russian | 1331 | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1326 | 1142 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1044 |

## Instruction Following

- MiniMax-M2: 70.2 (#166)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1328 | 1158 |

## Long Context

- MiniMax-M2: 40.5 (#153)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1331 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiniMax-M2: 53.0 (#162)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

| Benchmark | MiniMax-M2 | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1286 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1361 | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is MiniMax-M2 better than Qwen1.5-110B?

MiniMax-M2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.4 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiniMax-M2 or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

MiniMax-M2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.3 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2 and Qwen1.5-110B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2 has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.