Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs MiniMax M2.1

MiniMax M2.1 leads GPT-4o (2024-08-06) on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 7.7, and MiniMax M2.1 costs 8.3x less per output token ($1.20 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 16 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
26.3
Output $/M
$10.00
3
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
13
vs boards won of 16 shared

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
16
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) only
42
MiniMax M2.1 only
18
Like-for-like categories
7 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
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) not benchmarked, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 56.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AIME: GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 14.0% against MiniMax M2.1 77.9%, 64.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) $10.00 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 8.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) takes 128K tokens, MiniMax M2.1 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
CategoryGPT-4o (2024-08-06)BarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding02
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Math12
Knowledge23
General02
All shared boards313
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
Aider polyglot23.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SWE-bench Lite21.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)31.7%81.0%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)8.3%28.8%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-BenchNot measured36.6%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured623.8Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1278Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index7.720.9MiniMax M2.1
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 GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom28.9%85.4%MiniMax M2.1
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured78.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)64.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)52.1%83.0%MiniMax M2.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)2.3%23.2%MiniMax M2.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)49.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SimpleBench17.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Chess puzzles6.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1264Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: expert1241Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1277Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
AIME14.0%77.9%MiniMax M2.1
MATH 500 (Vals AI)75.2%89.0%MiniMax M2.1
MGSM (Vals AI)90.7%87.8%GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
AA Math IndexNot measured82.7Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured82.7%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME6.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 30.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MATH level 553.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: math1285Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
MMLU Pro74.1%87.0%MiniMax M2.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.1%75.5%GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured55.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)39.4%58.9%MiniMax M2.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.1%66.3%GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MedQA (Vals AI)88.2%91.2%MiniMax M2.1
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured34.1%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SimpleQA Verified26.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MMLU84.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: science1274Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1252Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1275Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1232Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1201Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1220Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1134Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1207Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1166Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1190Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1131Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured80.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
IFBench36.0%69.9%MiniMax M2.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.0%67.7%MiniMax M2.1
LMArena Text1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1274Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision1065Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: English1297Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: non-English1262Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1254Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: German1257Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1234Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1218Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: French1263Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1269Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Russian1272Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1279Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1290Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision: English1072Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1009Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1Leader
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

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.0075Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.155Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.600Exceeds the context window
MiniMax M2.1$0.072Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.1 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 GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiniMax M2.1
MakerOpenAIMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 6, 2024December 23, 2025
Context window128K205K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.30
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-08-06) better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or MiniMax M2.1?

MiniMax M2.1, with 205K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

16 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-08-06)'s coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2.1's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next