Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2 vs MiniMax M2.1

MiniMax M2.1 leads Mercury 2 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 10.8, and Mercury 2 costs 1.6x less per output token ($0.75 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.75
1
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
14
vs boards won of 15 shared

Mercury 2 or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

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

Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($0.75 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
15
Mercury 2 only
27
MiniMax M2.1 only
19
Like-for-like categories
6 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
Mercury 2 not benchmarked, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 21.8 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: UI components: Mercury 2 996 against MiniMax M2.1 1220, 28.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mercury 2 $0.75 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 1.6x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2 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
CategoryMercury 2BarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding11
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Web design07
General02
All shared boards114
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax M2.1Leader
LMArena WebDev1171Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
AA Coding Index31.1Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 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)Not measured81.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SciCode37.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%28.8%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-BenchNot measured36.6%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
WeirdML43.2%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
ALE-Bench785.6623.8Mercury 2
LMArena Text: coding1390Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1385Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1160Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1199Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.820.9MiniMax 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 Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom70.8%85.4%MiniMax M2.1
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured78.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)77.0%83.0%MiniMax M2.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%23.2%MiniMax M2.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts1362Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: expert1358Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1374Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax 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
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax M2.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured87.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured75.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured55.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured58.9%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured66.3%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured91.2%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured34.1%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1343Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1363Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1349Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: websites10351201MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: UI components9961220MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: game dev9831134MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: data viz10101206MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: 3D9821164MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: all code categories10211190MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: SVG9971131MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: ASCII art988Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
General benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax M2.1Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured80.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
IFBench69.8%69.9%MiniMax M2.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)43.7%67.7%MiniMax M2.1
LMArena Text1354Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1328Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1286Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: English1378Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1330Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1414Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1304Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1357Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1329Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1300Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1314Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkMercury 2MiniMax 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

Mercury 2$0.0006Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window
MiniMax M2.1$0.072Exceeds the context window

Mercury 2 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 Mercury 2 and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationInception Mercury 2MiniMax M2.1
MakerInceptionMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 4, 2026December 23, 2025
Context window128K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.75$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2 better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($0.75 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or MiniMax M2.1?

Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 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, Mercury 2 or MiniMax M2.1?

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

How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark 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