Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.5 vs MiniMax M2.1

GPT-5.5 leads MiniMax M2.1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 38.4 to 20.9, and MiniMax M2.1 costs 25.0x less per output token ($1.20 vs $30.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 26 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.5OpenAI
Coding
71.3
Overall
69.2
Output $/M
$30.00
26
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
0
vs boards won of 26 shared

GPT-5.5 or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

Only GPT-5.5 has a coding score, 71.3 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 25.0x cheaper ($1.20 vs $30.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.59 against $1.65).

Shared results
26
GPT-5.5 only
108
MiniMax M2.1 only
8
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-5.5 71.3 from 5 benchmarks, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 27.0 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Terminal-Bench: GPT-5.5 84.7% against MiniMax M2.1 36.6%, 48.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.5 $30.00 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.5 takes 1.05M 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-5.5BarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding50
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning30
Knowledge60
Web design70
General30
All shared boards260
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index50
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
LiveBench coding85.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev1513Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
AA Coding Index74.9Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.3%81.8%GPT-5.5
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)82.6%74.8%GPT-5.5
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)69.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)45.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)76.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)62.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured81.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SciCode56.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)60.6%28.8%GPT-5.5
Terminal-Bench84.7%36.6%GPT-5.5
FrontierCode43.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
GSO-Bench40.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
WeirdML84.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MirrorCode10.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ALE-Bench1943.0623.8GPT-5.5
LMArena Text: coding1494Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1493Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1506Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1543Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1532Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index38.420.9GPT-5.5
Epoch Capabilities Index159.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Agentic Index36.4Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1117Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1089Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1142Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1164Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1173Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1179Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1017Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1085Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench research61.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench browser48.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench long agentic44.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)3.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)51.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)21.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)40.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)64.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)8.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom93.9%85.4%GPT-5.5
APEX-Agents55.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Remote Labor Index6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
OSWorld 2.013.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
DeepResearch Bench54.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
PostTrainBench27.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$7,524Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA Diamond93.2%78.5%GPT-5.5
LiveBench reasoning89.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)88.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)93.5%83.0%GPT-5.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)45.8%23.2%GPT-5.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ARC-AGI95.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ARC-AGI-285.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SimpleBench69.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Chess puzzles63.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles56.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
EBR-bench34.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1489Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: expert1507Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1483Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1325Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1332Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
AIMENot measured77.9%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured89.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured87.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured82.7Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured82.7%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME84.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 385.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 472.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ProofBench50.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: math1487Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1496Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
MMLU Pro88.1%87.0%GPT-5.5
LegalBench (Vals AI)86.5%75.5%GPT-5.5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)66.2%55.8%GPT-5.5
CorpFin (Vals AI)68.4%58.9%GPT-5.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.0%66.3%GPT-5.5
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured91.2%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.1%34.1%GPT-5.5
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SimpleQA Verified63.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: science1485Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1465Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1491Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1478Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite66.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: websites12561201GPT-5.5
Design Arena: UI components12571220GPT-5.5
Design Arena: game dev12931134GPT-5.5
Design Arena: data viz12641207GPT-5.5
Design Arena: 3D11971164GPT-5.5
Design Arena: all code categories12591190GPT-5.5
Design Arena: SVG12341131GPT-5.5
Design Arena: ASCII art1255Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench design70.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
General benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1Leader
LiveBench data analysis81.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)60.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)51.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)86.9%80.8%GPT-5.5
Vals Multimodal Index68.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
IFBench75.9%69.9%GPT-5.5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.3%67.7%GPT-5.5
DTBench96.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMCA54.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Surface Evolver Bench88.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Furniture assembly44.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ExploitBench47.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
CL-bench Life22.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text1471Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1478Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1455Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision1297Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: English1470Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1467Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1534Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: German1480Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1499Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1460Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: French1485Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1468Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1473Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1465Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1476Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1484Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1466Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1449Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: English1292Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1360Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1306Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1293Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1231Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1301Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Document1486Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.5MiniMax 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-5.5$0.020Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.5$0.340Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.5$1.30Fits 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-5.5 and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.5MiniMax M2.1
MakerOpenAIMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 24, 2026December 23, 2025
Context window1.05M205K
Input $/Mtok$5.00$0.30
Output $/Mtok$30.00$1.20
Coding index71.3Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it51
Cost per solved task$1.65$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.5 better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Only GPT-5.5 has a coding score, 71.3 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 25.0x cheaper ($1.20 vs $30.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.59 against $1.65).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.5 or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-5.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $30.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.5 costs $1.65 and MiniMax M2.1 $0.59.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.5 or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-5.5, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.5 vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

26 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.5's coding index rests on 5 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