Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

MiniMax M2.1 vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

MiniMax M2.1 leads Qwen2.5 72B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 7.7, and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs 3.0x less per output token ($0.40 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 10 benchmarks have a result for both.

MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
10
Qwen2.5 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
26.5
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 10 shared

MiniMax M2.1 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: which to pick

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

Pick MiniMax M2.1 for a larger context window (205K against 33K tokens).

Shared results
10
MiniMax M2.1 only
24
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct only
43
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
MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 68.7 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
AA Math Index: MiniMax M2.1 82.7 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 14.0, 68.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 against Qwen2.5 72B Instruct $0.40 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
Context window
MiniMax M2.1 takes 205K tokens, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct 33K.

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 M2.1BarsQwen2.5 72B InstructTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
Math20
Knowledge10
General10
All shared boards100
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)74.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)81.0%27.6%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%4.5%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-Bench36.6%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
WeirdMLNot measured16.0%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
ALE-Bench623.8Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1292Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1292Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index20.97.7MiniMax M2.1
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured129.0Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom85.4%34.5%MiniMax M2.1
METR time horizonsNot measured35.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
BALROGNot measured16.2%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
TheAgentCompanyNot measured5.7%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond78.5%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)83.0%49.1%MiniMax M2.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)23.2%3.6%MiniMax M2.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured49.1%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
BIG-Bench HardNot measured79.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1271Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1245Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1279Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
AIME77.9%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)89.0%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)87.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
AA Math Index82.714.0MiniMax M2.1
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)82.7%14.0%MiniMax M2.1
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured8.1%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured63.2%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1283Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1290Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro87.0%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.5%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)55.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)58.9%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.3%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)91.2%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)34.1%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)87.5%72.0%MiniMax M2.1
MMLUNot measured85.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
AI2 Reasoning ChallengeNot measured94.5%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1275Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1258Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1288Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1253Only Qwen2.5 72B 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 MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1201Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1220Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1134Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1206Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1164Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1190Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG1131Not measuredOnly 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 index10
General benchmarks for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)80.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
IFBench69.9%36.9%MiniMax M2.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)67.7%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.1 measured
DTBenchNot measured62.9%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured13.4%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
HellaSwagNot measured84.8%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
WinoGrandeNot measured82.3%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
PIQANot measured82.6%Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena TextNot measured1269Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1254Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1221Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1283Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1252Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1273Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1234Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1180Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1188Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1280Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1255Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1264Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1272Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1281Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1247Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1211Only Qwen2.5 72B Instruct measured
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 MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B InstructLeader
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 M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.0006Fits in one request

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.019Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

MiniMax M2.1$0.072Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct$0.076Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.1 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 M2.1 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
SpecificationMiniMax M2.1Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
MakerMiniMaxQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 23, 2025September 19, 2024
Context window205K33K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.36
Output $/Mtok$1.20$0.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved task$0.59Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is MiniMax M2.1 better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M2.1 for a larger context window (205K against 33K tokens).

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2.1 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs $0.36 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M2.1 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

MiniMax M2.1, with 205K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M2.1 vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct comparison based on?

10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. MiniMax M2.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next