Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

MiniMax M2.5 vs Mistral Medium 3.1

MiniMax M2.5 leads Mistral Medium 3.1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 to 9.2, and MiniMax M2.5 costs 1.7x less per output token ($1.20 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 50 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace MiniMax M2.5 Replace Mistral Medium 3.1
MiniMax M2.5MiniMax
Coding
37.2
Overall
37.3
Output $/M
$1.20
21
Mistral Medium 3.1Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.00
29
vs boards won of 50 shared

MiniMax M2.5 or Mistral Medium 3.1: which to pick

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Mistral Medium 3.1 for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Model AMiniMax M2.5MiniMax37.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.62 per solved taskModel BMistral Medium 3.1Mistral AINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
50
MiniMax M2.5 only
18
Mistral Medium 3.1 only
24
Like-for-like categories
8 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 M2.5 37.2 from 3 benchmarks, Mistral Medium 3.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 54.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: MiniMax M2.5 95.3% against Mistral Medium 3.1 40.6%, 54.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
MiniMax M2.5 $1.20 against Mistral Medium 3.1 $2.00 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
Context window
MiniMax M2.5 takes 205K tokens, Mistral Medium 3.1 131K.

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 M2.5BarsMistral Medium 3.1Ties
Coding32
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning23
Math12
Knowledge45
Web design70
General217
All shared boards2129
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index32
Coding benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
SWE-bench Verified75.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual68.3%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev1386Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured20.5Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)79.2%44.8%MiniMax M2.5
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)74.2%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)14.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured40.6%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
SciCodeNot measured32.4%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)34.8%10.6%MiniMax M2.5
Terminal-Bench42.7%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
ALE-Bench618.2210.2MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: coding13801433Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: software and IT13831436Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena WebDev: React1374Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1414Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index22.89.2MiniMax M2.5
Epoch Capabilities Index146.6Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.9Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom95.3%40.6%MiniMax M2.5
Vending-Bench 2-$23Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Reasoning benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
GPQA Diamond82.1%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured63.0%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.8%58.8%MiniMax M2.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)20.5%4.7%MiniMax M2.5
ARC-AGI63.7%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
ARC-AGI-24.9%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13721426Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: expert13781408Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13841435Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1175Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1165Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark55.2%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
Math benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
AIME88.8%42.3%MiniMax M2.5
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured87.0%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured90.9%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured38.3Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured38.3%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
ProofBench4.0%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: math13781408Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work13781412Mistral Medium 3.1
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index45
Knowledge benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
MMLU Pro80.1%75.3%MiniMax M2.5
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.0%62.0%MiniMax M2.5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)53.5%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)59.6%50.7%MiniMax M2.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)68.2%70.3%Mistral Medium 3.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured36.5%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.5%78.2%MiniMax M2.5
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured68.3%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Text: science13691444Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13571449Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: legal and government13661439Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: business and finance13561418Mistral Medium 3.1
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index70
Web design benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
Design Arena: websites12221132MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: UI components11731097MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: game dev11761073MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: data viz11721144MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: 3D11701081MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: all code categories12071120MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: SVG1150992MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured997Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index217
General benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
IFBench71.6%39.8%MiniMax M2.5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.3%42.7%MiniMax M2.5
DTBenchNot measured67.5%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMCANot measured19.1%Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
CL-bench11.4%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
CL-bench Life6.3%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text13591424Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: instruction following13531398Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: creative writing13311391Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1172Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Text: English13801438Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: non-English13381408Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: Chinese13931447Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: German13611432Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: Japanese11711379Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: Korean12331380Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: French13631460Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: Spanish13531433Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: Russian13591411Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: Polish13341430Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn13641418Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: longer queries13661406Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: writing and language13451395Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13291390Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1179Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1190Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1175Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1168Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1145Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1147Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1200Only Mistral Medium 3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1Leader
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

MiniMax M2.5$0.0009Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3.1$0.0014Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

MiniMax M2.5$0.019Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3.1$0.026Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

MiniMax M2.5$0.072Exceeds the context window
Mistral Medium 3.1$0.100Exceeds 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 M2.5 and Mistral Medium 3.1
SpecificationMiniMax M2.5Mistral Medium 3.1
MakerMiniMaxMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedFebruary 12, 2026August 13, 2025
Context window205K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.40
Output $/Mtok$1.20$2.00
Coding index37.2Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.62Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is MiniMax M2.5 better than Mistral Medium 3.1 for coding?

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mistral Medium 3.1 for work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2.5 or Mistral Medium 3.1?

MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 costs $0.40 and $2.00. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M2.5 or Mistral Medium 3.1?

MiniMax M2.5, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M2.5 vs Mistral Medium 3.1 comparison based on?

50 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. MiniMax M2.5's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Mistral Medium 3.1's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next