MiniMax M2.7
VS
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
MiniMax M2.7 vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15: which wins at real work?
22 task areas · same graded test runs · rank comparison only, so 0–100 and Elo collections never mix raw scores.
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 wins 22 of 22 task areas we tested; MiniMax M2.7 takes 0. MiniMax M2.7 costs 2.0× less per token ($0.9 vs $1.82 per 1M).
MiniMax M2.7 costs 2.0× less per token ($0.9 vs $1.82 per 1M).
Task by task
| Task area | MiniMax M2.7 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Training & Education |
#106
/ 110
Usable
|
#6
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Customer Support |
#108
/ 113
Needs editing
|
#18
/ 113
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| AI Strategy |
#119
/ 126
Usable
|
#32
/ 126
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| RAG, Safety & Grounding |
#94
/ 113
Strong
|
#7
/ 113
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Frontend & Landing Pages |
#89
/ 109
Weak
|
#3
/ 109
Usable
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Chef / Home Cooking |
#124
/ 126
Weak
|
#40
/ 126
Usable
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Sales |
#108
/ 110
Weak
|
#27
/ 110
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Translation & Localization |
#82
/ 110
Excellent
|
#10
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Legal & HR |
#81
/ 110
Strong
|
#13
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Data & Analytics |
#92
/ 110
Excellent
|
#26
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Summarization & Meeting Notes |
#104
/ 110
Strong
|
#46
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Knowledge & Docs |
#108
/ 110
Weak
|
#51
/ 110
Usable
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Content & Brand |
#96
/ 124
Usable
|
#45
/ 124
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Executive Assistant |
#107
/ 112
Usable
|
#61
/ 112
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Presentations & Decks |
#83
/ 110
Strong
|
#40
/ 110
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Creative & Comedy | #108 / 110 | #71 / 110 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Coding |
#105
/ 115
Usable
|
#71
/ 115
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Landing Pages |
#68
/ 72
Needs editing
|
#36
/ 72
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Investor & Pitch |
#66
/ 66
Weak
|
#36
/ 66
Usable
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Product & Project Management |
#64
/ 110
Strong
|
#40
/ 110
Strong
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Research & Competitive Analysis |
#96
/ 110
Needs editing
|
#73
/ 110
Usable
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
| Structured Output |
#33
/ 113
Excellent
|
#18
/ 113
Excellent
|
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
Rank = position among every model config we tested in that task area (lower is better). Sorted by biggest gap first.
Frequently asked
Is MiniMax M2.7 better than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?
Across 22 task areas we benchmarked, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 ranks higher in 22 and MiniMax M2.7 in 0.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2.7 or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?
MiniMax M2.7 costs 2.0× less per token ($0.9 vs $1.82 per 1M).
What is Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 better at?
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 out-ranks MiniMax M2.7 at Training & Education, Customer Support, AI Strategy.
More comparisons
This page is Spring Prompt, running in public
We just did this for every model. Do it for your prompt.
The rankings above come from running real tasks through real models and scoring every output. Spring Prompt is that same engine — pointed at your prompt, your test cases, and your definition of good.
- Generate test cases from your prompt — no eval set required to start.
- Compare models side by side with quality, cost and latency in one matrix.
- Optimise the winner until the scores say it's ready to ship.
Prompt × model results
12 test cases · 3 evals