Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs MiniMax M2

MiniMax M2 leads Llama 3.3 70B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.6 to 7.7, and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct costs 1.4x less per output token ($0.72 vs $1.02 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 37 benchmarks have a result for both.

Llama 3.3 70B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
26.0
Output $/M
$0.72
0
MiniMax M2MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.02
37
vs boards won of 37 shared

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct or MiniMax M2: which to pick

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

Pick Llama 3.3 70B Instruct for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($0.72 vs $1.02 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
37
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct only
15
MiniMax M2 only
13
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 3.3 70B Instruct not benchmarked, MiniMax M2 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 60.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run): Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 7.7% against MiniMax M2 78.3%, 70.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct $0.72 against MiniMax M2 $1.02 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct takes 131K tokens, MiniMax M2 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 3.3 70B InstructBarsMiniMax M2Ties
Coding04
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math04
Knowledge05
General017
All shared boards037
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured61.0%Only MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1297Only MiniMax M2 measured
AA Coding Index11.9Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%82.6%MiniMax M2
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.0%25.8%MiniMax M2
Terminal-BenchNot measured30.0%Only MiniMax M2 measured
WeirdML14.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding12681371MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: software and IT12731373MiniMax M2
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1306Only MiniMax M2 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 Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
AA Intelligence Index7.718.6MiniMax M2
Epoch Capabilities Index127.3Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom26.6%86.8%MiniMax M2
BALROG23.0%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$161Only MiniMax M2 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)31.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)49.8%77.7%MiniMax M2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.6%13.7%MiniMax M2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
SimpleBench19.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12571357MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: expert12251338MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12771376MiniMax M2
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured57.8%Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
AA Math Index7.778.3MiniMax M2
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)7.7%78.3%MiniMax M2
OTIS Mock AIME5.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
MATH level 541.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math12671351MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: mathematical work12671368MiniMax M2
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)71.3%82.0%MiniMax M2
MMLU86.3%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science12841348MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12751367MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: legal and government12841349MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: business and finance12431336MiniMax M2
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1143Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1137Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1118Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1140Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1098Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1135Only MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1100Only MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index017
General benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
IFBench47.1%72.3%MiniMax M2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)15.7%64.3%MiniMax M2
DTBench59.5%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMCA17.5%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text12741340MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: instruction following12421329MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: creative writing12501286MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: English13031364MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: non-English12361313MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: Chinese12171366MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: German12511357MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: Japanese1150Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Korean1142Not measuredOnly Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: French12821336MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: Spanish12691326MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: Russian12521330MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: Polish12591312MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: multi-turn12801361MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: longer queries12551331MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: writing and language12551295MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12411298MiniMax M2
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
BenchmarkLlama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2Leader
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 3.3 70B Instruct$0.0008Fits in one request
MiniMax M2$0.0008Fits in one request

MiniMax M2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.025Fits in one request
MiniMax M2$0.016Fits in one request

MiniMax M2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.097Exceeds the context window
MiniMax M2$0.061Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2 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 3.3 70B Instruct and MiniMax M2
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.3 70B InstructMiniMax M2
MakerMeta LlamaMiniMax
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 6, 2024October 23, 2025
Context window131K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.45$0.255
Output $/Mtok$0.72$1.02
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.702
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.3 70B Instruct better than MiniMax M2 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.3 70B Instruct for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($0.72 vs $1.02 per million) and work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct or MiniMax M2?

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct costs $0.45 per million input tokens and $0.72 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2 costs $0.255 and $1.02. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct or MiniMax M2?

MiniMax M2, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs MiniMax M2 comparison based on?

37 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Llama 3.3 70B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next