Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Qwen3.5 397B A17B leads MiniMax M1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 21.4 to 11.7, at about the same output price ($2.34 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 29 benchmarks have a result for both.

MiniMax M1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.20
0
Qwen3.5 397B A17BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
57.1
Output $/M
$2.34
29
vs boards won of 29 shared

MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B: which to pick

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

Pick MiniMax M1 for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($2.20 vs $2.34 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 262K tokens).

Shared results
29
MiniMax M1 only
0
Qwen3.5 397B A17B only
37
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, Qwen3.5 397B A17B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 19.4 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Japanese: MiniMax M1 1217 against Qwen3.5 397B A17B 1429, 35.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
MiniMax M1 $2.20 against Qwen3.5 397B A17B $2.34 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
Context window
MiniMax M1 takes 1M tokens, Qwen3.5 397B A17B 262K.

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 M1BarsQwen3.5 397B A17BTies
Coding02
Intelligence01
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General017
All shared boards029
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1400Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
SciCodeNot measured44.8%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured40.9%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
ALE-BenchNot measured621.9Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: coding13591464Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: software and IT13591463Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1388Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1410Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.721.4Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.8Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured95.6%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured24.9%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B 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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured89.3%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured29.0%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured86.4%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured18.0%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13391448Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: expert13171462Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13531450Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1277Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1292Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B 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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured88.9%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured31.2%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: math13611453Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: mathematical work13631454Qwen3.5 397B A17B
MathArenaNot measured19.2%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
LMArena Text: science13541457Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13551455Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: legal and government13371441Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: business and finance13191435Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1190Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1161Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1140Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1175Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1160Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1179Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1139Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B 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 MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
IFBenchNot measured78.8%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured77.3%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
DTBenchNot measured87.5%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMCANot measured37.9%Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text13431437Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: instruction following13121424Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: creative writing12971402Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena VisionNot measured1262Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Text: English13631443Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: non-English13191430Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Chinese13601498Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: German13501445Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Japanese12171429Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Korean12661384Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: French13701462Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Spanish13531441Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Russian13291430Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: Polish13291447Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: multi-turn13351446Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: longer queries13261441Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: writing and language13111415Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13031399Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1268Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1314Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1271Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1262Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1230Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1265Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1260Only Qwen3.5 397B A17B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for MiniMax M1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B
BenchmarkMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17BLeader
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
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.0016Fits in one request

MiniMax M1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

MiniMax M1$0.027Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.027Fits in one request

Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

MiniMax M1$0.102Fits in one request
Qwen3.5 397B A17B$0.101Fits in one request

Qwen3.5 397B A17B 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 Qwen3.5 397B A17B
SpecificationMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17B
MakerMiniMaxQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJune 17, 2025February 16, 2026
Context window1M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.40$0.39
Output $/Mtok$2.20$2.34
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is MiniMax M1 better than Qwen3.5 397B A17B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M1 for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($2.20 vs $2.34 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 262K tokens).

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

MiniMax M1 costs $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs $0.39 and $2.34. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?

MiniMax M1, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B comparison based on?

29 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. MiniMax M1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5 397B A17B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next