MiniMax M2 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus leads MiniMax M2 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 25.2 to 18.6, and MiniMax M2 costs 1.3x less per output token ($1.02 vs $1.28 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 40 benchmarks have a result for both.
MiniMax M2 or Qwen3.7 Plus: which to pick
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick MiniMax M2 for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($1.02 vs $1.28 per million).
- Shared results
- 40
- MiniMax M2 only
- 10
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 35
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus leads, 25.2 against 18.6.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a AA Agentic Index result, 17.5.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus leads, 1269 against 1143.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus takes 1M tokens against 205K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
MiniMax M2
MiniMax M2 $0.0008, Qwen3.7 Plus $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only MiniMax M2 has the number, $0.702.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- MiniMax M2 not benchmarked, Qwen3.7 Plus 33.2 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- General, 19.3 points apart on average over 17 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LMArena Text: creative writing: MiniMax M2 1286 against Qwen3.7 Plus 1438, 25.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- MiniMax M2 $1.02 against Qwen3.7 Plus $1.28 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
- Context window
- MiniMax M2 takes 205K tokens, Qwen3.7 Plus 1M.
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.
| Category | MiniMax M2 | Bars | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 3 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 5 | ||
| Math | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 4 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 7 | ||
| General | 0 | 17 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 40 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 61.0% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1297 | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 55.9 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 46.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 12.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 54.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.6% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 46.1% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 25.8% | 47.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Terminal-Bench | 30.0% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| FrontierCode | Not measured | 10.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1371 | 1473 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1373 | 1473 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1306 | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 18.6 | 25.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 147.0 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 17.5 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 10.5% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 16.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 49.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 86.8% | 93.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| OSWorld 2.0 | Not measured | 2.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $161 | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.7% | 90.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 13.7% | 35.6% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 87.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 17.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1357 | 1460 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1338 | 1466 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1376 | 1460 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1292 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1295 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.8% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 78.3 | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 78.3% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 93.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 34.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1351 | 1467 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1368 | 1470 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 66.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.0% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1348 | 1464 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1367 | 1464 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1349 | 1451 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1336 | 1435 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1143 | 1269 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1137 | 1258 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1118 | 1261 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1140 | 1276 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1098 | 1238 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1135 | 1269 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1100 | 1208 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1143 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index017
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 39.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Vals Multimodal Index | Not measured | 53.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| IFBench | 72.3% | 78.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 64.3% | 73.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| DTBench | Not measured | 84.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 37.6% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1454 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1329 | 1439 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1286 | 1438 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1278 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1364 | 1458 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1313 | 1445 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1366 | 1509 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: German | 1357 | 1471 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1412 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1413 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1336 | 1472 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1326 | 1457 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1330 | 1457 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1312 | 1449 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1361 | 1459 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1331 | 1454 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1295 | 1437 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1298 | 1422 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1280 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1332 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1288 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1261 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1258 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Document | Not measured | 1444 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
MiniMax M2 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
MiniMax M2 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.
| Specification | MiniMax M2 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | MiniMax | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | October 23, 2025 | June 3, 2026 |
| Context window | 205K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.255 | $0.32 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.02 | $1.28 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 33.2 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.702 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is MiniMax M2 better than Qwen3.7 Plus for coding?
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M2 for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($1.02 vs $1.28 per million).
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
MiniMax M2 costs $0.255 per million input tokens and $1.02 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.32 and $1.28. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2 only.
Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus, with 1M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M2 vs Qwen3.7 Plus comparison based on?
40 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. MiniMax M2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.7 Plus's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.