LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Updated October 21, 2026. 38 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace MiniMax M2.5 Replace Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
MiniMax M2.5MiniMax
Coding
59.4
Overall
22.8
Output $/M
$0.95
6
Qwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen
Coding
22.9
Overall
17.7
Output $/M
$2.08
32
vs boards won of 38 shared

Decision reading

Pick MiniMax M2.5 for coding: it scores 59.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 22.9 for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.

Pick Qwen3.5-122B-A10B when the context window is larger, 262K against 205K tokens, or when what matters is LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Model AMiniMax M2.5MiniMax59.4/1002 independent benchmarks$0.62 per solved taskModel BQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen22.9/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
38
MiniMax M2.5 only
29
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
13
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 59.4 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 22.9 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
General, 10.3 points apart on average over 19 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Japanese: MiniMax M2.5 1171 against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 1367, 32.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
MiniMax M2.5 $0.95 against Qwen3.5-122B-A10B $2.08 per million output tokens, 2.2x apart.
Context window
MiniMax M2.5 takes 205K tokens, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 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 M2.5BarsQwen3.5-122B-A10BTies
Coding42
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge04
General019
All shared boards632
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index42
Coding benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
SWE-bench Verified75.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual68.3%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev13861361MiniMax M2.5
AA Coding IndexNot measured43.3Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)79.2%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
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
SciCodeNot measured39.7%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)34.8%31.1%MiniMax M2.5
Terminal-Bench42.7%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
ALE-Bench618.2Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding13801436Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: software and IT13831436Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena WebDev: React13741353MiniMax M2.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML14141351MiniMax M2.5
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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AA Intelligence Index22.817.7MiniMax 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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom95.3%93.6%MiniMax M2.5
Vending-Bench 2-$23Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 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 MiniMax M2.5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
GPQA Diamond82.1%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.8%85.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)20.5%25.2%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
ARC-AGI63.7%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
ARC-AGI-24.9%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured17.0%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13721421Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: expert13781431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13841431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1261Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
AIME88.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
ProofBench4.0%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: math13781431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: mathematical work13781431Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
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 M2.5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
MMLU Pro80.1%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.0%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)53.5%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)59.6%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)68.2%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.5%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: science13691432Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13571423Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: legal and government13661422Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: business and finance13561414Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
Design Arena: websites1222Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1172Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1176Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1171Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1170Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1207Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1147Not measuredOnly 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 index019
General benchmarks for MiniMax M2.5 and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
IFBench71.6%75.7%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.3%76.3%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
DTBenchNot measured84.3%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMCANot measured32.2%Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
CL-bench11.4%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
CL-bench Life6.3%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text13591417Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: instruction following13531399Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: creative writing13311368Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena VisionNot measured1244Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Text: English13801428Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: non-English13381401Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Chinese13931463Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: German13611425Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Japanese11711367Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Korean12331353Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: French13631443Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Spanish13531425Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Russian13591400Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: Polish13341398Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: multi-turn13641416Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: longer queries13661410Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: writing and language13451387Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13291366Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1249Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1301Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1251Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1243Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1220Only Qwen3.5-122B-A10B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10BLeader
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$0.0007Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.0013Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

MiniMax M2.5$0.016Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

MiniMax M2.5$0.064Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0.073Fits in one request

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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
SpecificationMiniMax M2.5Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
MakerMiniMaxQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedFebruary 12, 2026February 25, 2026
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.27$0.26
Output $/Mtok$0.95$2.08
Coding index59.422.9
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$0.62Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is MiniMax M2.5 better than Qwen3.5-122B-A10B for coding?

Pick MiniMax M2.5 for coding: it scores 59.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 22.9 for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B. Pick Qwen3.5-122B-A10B when the context window is larger, 262K against 205K tokens, or when what matters is LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2.5 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.27 per million input tokens and $0.95 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B costs $0.26 and $2.08. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M2.5 or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. MiniMax M2.5's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next