Model Comparison
V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning)
vs. M2.7
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · DeepSeek, MiniMax
Recommended Pick
Mi M2.7 14 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
M2.7
100.0 value score
55.0 reasoning / $0.52/1M
Lowest Price
M2.7
$0.30/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning)
61.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
M2.7
41.9 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
M2.7 has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
M2.7 is 5.5x cheaper on input tokens than V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning) leads M2.7 by 6.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
M2.7 leads V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning) by 8.2 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
M2.7 wins 14 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
M2.7
MiniMax
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | De V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning) | Top Pick Mi M2.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $1.64/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.75/1M | $1.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.91/1M | $0.52/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | MiniMax |
| Release Date | Sep 22, 2025 | Mar 18, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 43.6 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1596ms |
| Latency | — | 58127ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 30.7 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 61.5 | 55.0 |
| Intelligence | 33.9 | 49.6 |
| Coding | 33.7 | 41.9 |
| Math | 89.7 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 79.2% | 87.4% |
| MMLU Pro | 85.1% | — |
| HLE | 15.2% | 28.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 79.8% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 89.7% | — |
| SciCode | 40.6% | 47.0% |
| LCR | 65.0% | 68.7% |
| IFBench | 57.0% | 75.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 37.1% | 84.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 30.3% | 39.4% |
Key Takeaways
M2.7 offers the best value at $0.30/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 61.5 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
M2.7 reaches a 41.9 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
V3.1 Terminus (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
M2.7
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
