Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

MiniMax M2 vs Qwen3.5-9B

MiniMax M2 leads Qwen3.5-9B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.6 to 13.3, and Qwen3.5-9B costs 6.8x less per output token ($0.15 vs $1.02 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 8 benchmarks have a result for both.

MiniMax M2MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.02
4
Qwen3.5-9BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
3
vs boards won of 8 shared, 1 tied

MiniMax M2 or Qwen3.5-9B: which to pick

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

Pick MiniMax M2 for work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
8
MiniMax M2 only
42
Qwen3.5-9B only
7
Like-for-like categories
5 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 not benchmarked, Qwen3.5-9B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 11.2 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Terminal-Bench: MiniMax M2 30.0% against Qwen3.5-9B 9.2%, 20.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
MiniMax M2 $1.02 against Qwen3.5-9B $0.15 per million output tokens, 6.8x apart.
Context window
MiniMax M2 takes 205K tokens, Qwen3.5-9B 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 M2BarsQwen3.5-9BTies
Coding20
Intelligence10
Agentic work001 tie
Reasoning02
General11
All shared boards431 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
SWE-bench Verified61.0%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena WebDev1297Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured23.5Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)82.6%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
SciCodeNot measured29.5%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.8%24.2%MiniMax M2
Terminal-Bench30.0%9.2%MiniMax M2
LMArena Text: coding1371Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1373Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1306Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Intelligence Index18.613.3MiniMax M2
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured139.3Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index00
Agentic work benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom86.8%86.8%Tie
Vending-Bench 2$161Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)77.7%80.6%Qwen3.5-9B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%14.9%Qwen3.5-9B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured79.0%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1357Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: expert1338Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1376Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.8%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
AA Math Index78.3Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)78.3%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured61.7%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
LMArena Text: math1351Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1368Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.0%Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: science1348Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1367Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1349Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1336Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
Design Arena: websites1143Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: UI components1137Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: game dev1118Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1140Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: 3D1098Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1135Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Design Arena: SVG1100Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for MiniMax M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
IFBench72.3%66.7%MiniMax M2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)64.3%70.0%Qwen3.5-9B
DTBenchNot measured71.2%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
LMCANot measured24.5%Only Qwen3.5-9B measured
LMArena Text1340Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1329Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1286Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: English1364Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1313Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1366Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: German1357Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: French1336Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1326Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1330Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1312Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1361Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1331Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1295Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1298Not measuredOnly MiniMax M2 measured
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 M2 and Qwen3.5-9B
BenchmarkMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9BLeader
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$0.0008Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

MiniMax M2$0.016Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-9B$0.0054Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

MiniMax M2$0.061Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.5-9B$0.021Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-9B 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 and Qwen3.5-9B
SpecificationMiniMax M2Qwen3.5-9B
MakerMiniMaxQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 23, 2025March 10, 2026
Context window205K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.255$0.10
Output $/Mtok$1.02$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved task$0.702Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is MiniMax M2 better than Qwen3.5-9B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M2 for work measured by GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) or Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2 or Qwen3.5-9B?

MiniMax M2 costs $0.255 per million input tokens and $1.02 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M2 or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M2 vs Qwen3.5-9B comparison based on?

8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. MiniMax M2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.5-9B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next