Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

MiniMax M1 vs MiniMax M2.5

MiniMax M2.5 leads MiniMax M1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 11.7, and MiniMax M2.5 costs 1.8x less per output token ($1.20 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 29 benchmarks have a result for both.

MiniMax M1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.20
4
MiniMax M2.5MiniMax
Coding
37.2
Overall
37.3
Output $/M
$1.20
25
vs boards won of 29 shared

MiniMax M1 or MiniMax M2.5: which to pick

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick MiniMax M1 for a larger context window (1M against 205K tokens) and work measured by LMArena Text: Japanese or LMArena Text: Korean, where it leads.

Shared results
29
MiniMax M1 only
0
MiniMax M2.5 only
42
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
MiniMax M1 not benchmarked, MiniMax M2.5 37.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Intelligence, 11.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Intelligence Index: MiniMax M1 11.7 against MiniMax M2.5 22.8, 11.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
MiniMax M1 $2.20 against MiniMax M2.5 $1.20 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
MiniMax M1 takes 1M tokens, MiniMax M2.5 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
CategoryMiniMax M1BarsMiniMax M2.5Ties
Coding02
Intelligence01
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General413
All shared boards425
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured75.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured68.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1386Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured42.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured618.2Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding13591380MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: software and IT13591383MiniMax M2.5
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1374Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1414Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnANot measured10.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE Atlas: RefactoringNot measured19.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE Atlas: Test WritingNot measured18.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index11.722.8MiniMax M2.5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.6Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured95.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured-$23Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured82.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured20.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ARC-AGINot measured63.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured4.9%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13391372MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: expert13171379MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13531384MiniMax M2.5
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured55.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
AIMENot measured88.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ProofBenchNot measured4.0%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: math13611378MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work13631378MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured80.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.0%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured53.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured59.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured68.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured92.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: science13541369MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13551357MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: legal and government13371366MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: business and finance13191356MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1222Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1170Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1176Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1172Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1170Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1207Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1150Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index413
General benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
IFBenchNot measured71.6%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured73.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CL-benchNot measured11.4%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured6.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text13431359MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: instruction following13121353MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: creative writing12971331MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: English13631380MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: non-English13191338MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Chinese13601393MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: German13501361MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Japanese12181171MiniMax M1
LMArena Text: Korean12661233MiniMax M1
LMArena Text: French13701363MiniMax M1
LMArena Text: Spanish13531353MiniMax M1
LMArena Text: Russian13291359MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Polish13291334MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn13351364MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: longer queries13261366MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: writing and language13111345MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13031329MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5Leader
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

MiniMax M1$0.0015Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

MiniMax M1$0.027Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

MiniMax M1$0.102Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.072Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.5 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 MiniMax M1 and MiniMax M2.5
SpecificationMiniMax M1MiniMax M2.5
MakerMiniMaxMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 17, 2025February 12, 2026
Context window1M205K
Input $/Mtok$0.40$0.30
Output $/Mtok$2.20$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarked37.2
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.62
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is MiniMax M1 better than MiniMax M2.5 for coding?

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M1 for a larger context window (1M against 205K tokens) and work measured by LMArena Text: Japanese or LMArena Text: Korean, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M1 or MiniMax M2.5?

MiniMax M1 costs $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M1 or MiniMax M2.5?

MiniMax M1, with 1M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M1 vs MiniMax M2.5 comparison based on?

29 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. MiniMax M1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2.5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next