Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1 vs MiniMax M2.1

GPT-5.1 leads MiniMax M2.1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.7 to 20.9, and MiniMax M2.1 costs 8.3x less per output token ($1.20 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 32 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.1OpenAI
Coding
40.4
Overall
55.0
Output $/M
$10.00
23
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
9
vs boards won of 32 shared

GPT-5.1 or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

Only GPT-5.1 has a coding score, 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick MiniMax M2.1 for output tokens 8.3x cheaper ($1.20 vs $10.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.59 against $1.02).

Shared results
32
GPT-5.1 only
74
MiniMax M2.1 only
2
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
GPT-5.1 40.4 from 3 benchmarks, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 10.8 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
MedCode (Vals AI): GPT-5.1 52.7% against MiniMax M2.1 34.1%, 18.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1 $10.00 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 8.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1 takes 400K 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-5.1BarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding41
Intelligence10
Agentic work01
Reasoning30
Math40
Knowledge62
Web design25
General30
All shared boards239
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index41
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
SWE-bench Verified66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev1396Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
AA Coding Index49.4Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)86.5%81.8%GPT-5.1
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.8%74.8%MiniMax M2.1
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)24.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)86.8%81.0%GPT-5.1
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)45.5%28.8%GPT-5.1
Terminal-Bench47.6%36.6%GPT-5.1
GSO-Bench13.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
WeirdML60.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured623.8Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding1453Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1454Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1307Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1405Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1421Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index24.720.9GPT-5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index149.8Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom81.9%85.4%MiniMax M2.1
DeepResearch Bench42.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2$1,473Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MCP Atlas50.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA Diamond86.6%78.5%GPT-5.1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)83.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)87.3%83.0%GPT-5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.5%23.2%GPT-5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)87.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
ARC-AGI72.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
ARC-AGI-217.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
SimpleBench53.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Chess puzzles42.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles19.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
VPCT58.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1457Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: expert1470Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1462Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1264Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1272Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
AIME93.3%77.9%GPT-5.1
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured89.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)93.0%87.8%GPT-5.1
AA Math Index94.082.7GPT-5.1
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)94.0%82.7%GPT-5.1
OTIS Mock AIME88.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: math1446Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1449Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MathArena17.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index62
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
MMLU Pro86.4%87.0%MiniMax M2.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)85.7%75.5%GPT-5.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)73.4%55.8%GPT-5.1
CorpFin (Vals AI)63.8%58.9%GPT-5.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.9%66.3%GPT-5.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)96.4%91.2%GPT-5.1
MedCode (Vals AI)52.7%34.1%GPT-5.1
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)87.0%87.5%MiniMax M2.1
SimpleQA Verified48.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1459Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1456Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1459Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite45.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
PRBench Finance48.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
PRBench Legal49.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index25
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: websites11871201MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: UI components11641220MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: game dev11781134GPT-5.1
Design Arena: data viz12051206MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: 3D10601164MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: all code categories11701190MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: SVG11481131GPT-5.1
Design Arena: ASCII art1118Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)43.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)88.1%80.8%GPT-5.1
IFBench72.9%69.9%GPT-5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)80.0%67.7%GPT-5.1
DTBench90.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMCA43.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
CL-bench23.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
CL-bench Life17.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text1443Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1443Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1427Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision1250Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: English1451Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1495Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: German1438Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1453Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1401Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1450Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1433Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1435Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1440Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1450Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1448Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1428Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1415Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: English1252Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1270Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1255Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1263Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1252Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1266Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Document1403Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MultiChallenge63.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.1MiniMax 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-5.1$0.0063Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1$0.092Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1$0.350Fits in one request
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-5.1 and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1MiniMax M2.1
MakerOpenAIMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025December 23, 2025
Context window400K205K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.30
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.20
Coding index40.4Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it31
Cost per solved task$1.02$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1 better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Only GPT-5.1 has a coding score, 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M2.1 for output tokens 8.3x cheaper ($1.20 vs $10.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.59 against $1.02).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1 or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-5.1 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.1 costs $1.02 and MiniMax M2.1 $0.59.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1 or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-5.1, with 400K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1 vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

32 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.1's coding index rests on 3 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