Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct vs MiniMax M2.1

MiniMax M2.1 leads Llama 3.2 1B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 4.8, and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs 6.0x less per output token ($0.201 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 11 benchmarks have a result for both.

Llama 3.2 1B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
9.6
Output $/M
$0.201
0
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
11
vs boards won of 11 shared

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

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

Pick Llama 3.2 1B Instruct for output tokens 6.0x cheaper ($0.201 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
11
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct only
27
MiniMax M2.1 only
23
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
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct not benchmarked, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 85.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 0.0% against MiniMax M2.1 85.4%, 85.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct $0.201 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 6.0x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct takes 60K 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
CategoryLlama 3.2 1B InstructBarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding02
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Math02
Knowledge01
General02
All shared boards011
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax M2.1Leader
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)1.9%81.0%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.0%28.8%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-BenchNot measured36.6%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured623.8Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding1070Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1056Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index4.820.9MiniMax 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 Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax M2.1Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom0.0%85.4%MiniMax M2.1
BALROG6.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)10.8%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured78.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)19.6%83.0%MiniMax M2.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.5%23.2%MiniMax M2.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)23.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1044Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expert1007Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1087Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax 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 Index0.082.7MiniMax M2.1
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)0.0%82.7%MiniMax M2.1
OTIS Mock AIME0.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math1086Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1098Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax 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)20.0%87.5%MiniMax M2.1
LMArena Text: science1055Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1009Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1071Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1000Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax 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 measured1206Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1164Only 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 Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax M2.1Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured80.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
IFBench22.8%69.9%MiniMax M2.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)6.7%67.7%MiniMax M2.1
LMArena Text1055Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1031Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1033Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: English1117Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-English973Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Chinese959Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: German1014Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Russian941Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1030Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1050Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1030Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1025Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 1B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax 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

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0020Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct$0.0074Exceeds the context window
MiniMax M2.1$0.072Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct 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 Llama 3.2 1B Instruct and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.2 1B InstructMiniMax M2.1
MakerMeta LlamaMiniMax
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 25, 2024December 23, 2025
Context window60K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.027$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.201$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.2 1B Instruct better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.2 1B Instruct for output tokens 6.0x cheaper ($0.201 vs $1.20 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct or MiniMax M2.1?

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.201 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, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct or MiniMax M2.1?

MiniMax M2.1, with 205K tokens against 60K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.2 1B Instruct vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

11 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Llama 3.2 1B Instruct'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