Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs MiniMax M2

MiniMax M2 leads DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.6 to 14.8, at about the same output price ($1.02 vs $1.0142 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 39 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus Replace MiniMax M2
DeepSeek V3.1 TerminusDeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.0142
33
MiniMax M2MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.02
6
vs boards won of 39 shared

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or MiniMax M2: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for output tokens 1.0x cheaper ($1.0142 vs $1.02 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Model ADeepSeek V3.1 TerminusDeepSeekNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMiniMax M2MiniMaxNot benchmarked1 independent benchmark$0.702 per solved task
Shared results
39
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus only
6
MiniMax M2 only
11
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus not benchmarked, MiniMax M2 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 49.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 37.1% against MiniMax M2 86.8%, 49.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus $1.0142 against MiniMax M2 $1.02 per million output tokens, 1.0x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus takes 164K tokens, MiniMax M2 205K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusBarsMiniMax M2Ties
Coding31
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning41
Math30
Knowledge50
Web design61
General121
All shared boards336
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index31
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured61.0%Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1297Only MiniMax M2 measured
AA Coding Index43.5Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)79.8%82.6%MiniMax M2
SciCode38.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%25.8%DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Terminal-BenchNot measured30.0%Only MiniMax M2 measured
ALE-Bench745.2Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: coding14251371DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: software and IT14261373DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1306Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
AA Intelligence Index14.818.6MiniMax M2
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
AA Agentic Index6.8Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
τ²-Bench Telecom37.1%86.8%MiniMax M2
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$161Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%77.7%DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)16.4%13.7%DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: hard prompts14261357DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1338Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14321376DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.4%57.8%MiniMax M2
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
AA Math Index89.778.3DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)89.7%78.3%DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: math14021351DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1368Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.1%82.0%DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: science14511348DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14681367DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: legal and government14571349DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: business and finance14141336DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
Design Arena: websites11871143DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: UI components11821137DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: game dev11311118DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: data viz11681140DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: 3D11411098DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: all code categories11751135DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: SVG10651100MiniMax M2
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index121
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
IFBench57.0%72.3%MiniMax M2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%64.3%DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
DTBench81.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMCA28.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text14191340DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: instruction following14041329DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: creative writing14031286DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: English14291364DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: non-English14081313DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1366Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1357Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1336Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1326Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14351330DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: Polish14271312DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: multi-turn14111361DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: longer queries14221331DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: writing and language14091295DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13911298DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.0008Fits in one request
MiniMax M2$0.0008Fits in one request

MiniMax M2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.018Fits in one request
MiniMax M2$0.016Fits in one request

MiniMax M2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.071Exceeds the context window
MiniMax M2$0.061Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and MiniMax M2
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiniMax M2
MakerDeepSeekMiniMax
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2025October 23, 2025
Context window164K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.3063$0.255
Output $/Mtok$1.0142$1.02
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.702
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus better than MiniMax M2 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for output tokens 1.0x cheaper ($1.0142 vs $1.02 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or MiniMax M2?

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs $0.3063 per million input tokens and $1.0142 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2 costs $0.255 and $1.02. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or MiniMax M2?

MiniMax M2, with 205K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs MiniMax M2 comparison based on?

39 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next