Compare / Qwen3.6-Plus vs MiniMax-M2.7

Qwen3.6-Plus vs MiniMax-M2.7

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 26 results on 4 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3.6-Plus Released 31 Mar 2026 · $0.33 in · $1.95 out
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.7 Released 18 Mar 2026 · $0.30 in · $1.20 out
Qwen3.6-Plus wins 201 too close to callMiniMax-M2.7 wins 5

Of the 26 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.

Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs MiniMax, every model from both labs.

Qwen3.6-Plus or MiniMax-M2.7? The short answer

Pick Qwen3.6-Plus if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 27.0 against 22.8). Pick MiniMax-M2.7 if cost matters more: it costs 28% less per token.

  • MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper: $0.52 against $0.73 per million tokens, 28% less.
  • Qwen3.6-Plus scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 27.0 against 22.8.
  • Qwen3.6-Plus is newer: released 31 Mar 2026, against 18 Mar 2026 for MiniMax-M2.7.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3.6-Plus does better for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge, writing and sticking to the facts.

Head to head

27.0
Intelligence Index
22.8
$0.73
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$0.52
1,000,000
Context window, tokens
204,800

Every fact side by side

Qwen3.6-PlusMiniMax-M2.7
Price per million tokens$0.33 in · $1.95 out$0.30 in · $1.20 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.73$0.52
Cheapest host, blended–$0.37 (GMICloud, FP8)
Cached input, per million–$0.060 cached input
Intelligence Index27.022.8
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window1,000,000 tokens204,800 tokens
Released31 Mar 2026 (newer)18 Mar 2026
WeightsClosedOpen
Developer based inChinaChina

Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.

Which is better for what

Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 63 of 164 103 of 164
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 67 of 198 72 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 54 of 188 109 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 80 of 152 126 of 152

Every shared result

Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.

MeasureQwen3.6-PlusMiniMax-M2.7
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 76 · 118 of 387 measured 1,443 1,415
Overall · Text factualityArena rating, higher is better 84 · 110 of 163 measured 1,438 1,422
Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 75 · 101 of 380 measured 1,446 1,424
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 62 · 87 of 243 measured 27.0 22.8
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 58 · 63 of 231 measured 88.2% 87.4%
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 84 · 74 of 242 measured 27.8% 29.6%
OpenHands Index reported by OpenHands Index · 3 results
Average% resolved, higher is better 16 · 25 of 34 measured 52.9%openhands 43.4%openhands
Front end (SWE-Bench Multimodal)% resolved, higher is better 20 · 24 of 34 measured 30.9%openhands 27.9%openhands
Greenfield (Commit0)% resolved, higher is better 14 · 21 of 34 measured 25.0%openhands 18.8%openhands
UGI Leaderboard reported by UGI Leaderboard · 3 results
Writing score · UGIscore out of 100, higher is better 49 · 120 of 230 measured 58.2thinking reasoning 37.6
Requested-length error · UGI% off the requested word count, lower is better 25 · 182 of 230 measured 8.0%thinking reasoning 36.0%
Style adherence · UGIscore from 0 to 1, higher is better 96 · 26 of 230 measured 0.35no reasoning 0.38
Show all 26 results (14 more)
MeasureQwen3.6-PlusMiniMax-M2.7
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 4 results
Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 82 · 139 of 385 measured 1,407 1,364
Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 68 · 93 of 338 measured 1,476 1,453
Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 74 · 114 of 387 measured 1,435 1,407
Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 76 · 127 of 386 measured 1,423 1,387
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 7 results
Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks, higher is better 47 · 54 of 130 measured 61.4% 55.4%
τ-bench banking% of tasks, higher is better 48 · 77 of 121 measured 20.8% 9.9%
Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score, higher is better 50 · 54 of 131 measured 54.5 52.6
IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 29 · 22 of 195 measured 75.2% 75.7%
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 54 · 54 of 233 measured 78.3% 78.3%
Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 23 · 36 of 190 measured 43.9% 39.4%
τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 7 · 60 of 193 measured 97.7% 84.8%
OpenHands Index reported by OpenHands Index · 3 results
Information gathering (GAIA)% resolved, higher is better 11 · 31 of 34 measured 72.1%openhands 25.5%openhands
Issue resolution (SWE-Bench)% resolved, higher is better 17 · 10 of 34 measured 74.2%openhands 75.6%openhands
Testing (SWT-Bench)% resolved, higher is better 21 · 15 of 34 measured 62.1%openhands 69.1%openhands

Quick answers

Is Qwen3.6-Plus better than MiniMax-M2.7?

Pick Qwen3.6-Plus if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 27.0 against 22.8). Pick MiniMax-M2.7 if cost matters more: it costs 28% less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6-Plus or MiniMax-M2.7?

MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper: $0.52 against $0.73 per million tokens, 28% less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.6-Plus or MiniMax-M2.7?

Qwen3.6-Plus ranks 63 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 103 for MiniMax-M2.7.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.6-Plus or MiniMax-M2.7?

Qwen3.6-Plus ranks 67 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 72 for MiniMax-M2.7.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3.6-Plus or MiniMax-M2.7?

Qwen3.6-Plus ranks 54 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 109 for MiniMax-M2.7.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.6-Plus or MiniMax-M2.7?

Qwen3.6-Plus ranks 80 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 126 for MiniMax-M2.7.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.6-Plus or MiniMax-M2.7?

Qwen3.6-Plus: 1,000,000 tokens, against 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.7.

Run Qwen3.6-Plus and MiniMax-M2.7 on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.

Try the playgroundTalk to us