Model Comparison
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)
vs. M2.1
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Z AI, MiniMax
Recommended Pick
Mi M2.1 17 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
M2.1
100.0 value score
62.0 reasoning / $0.52/1M
Lowest Price
M2.1
$0.30/1M input price
Best Reasoning
M2.1
62.0 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
M2.1
32.8 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
M2.1 has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
M2.1 is 2.0x cheaper on input tokens than GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
M2.1 generates about 1.6x as many tokens per second as GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
M2.1 leads GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) by 21.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
M2.1 leads GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) by 0.8 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)
Z AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
M2.1
MiniMax
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Z GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Mi M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.60/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.20/1M | $1.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.00/1M | $0.52/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Z AI | MiniMax |
| Release Date | Dec 22, 2025 | Dec 23, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 107.5 tok/s | 169.0 tok/s |
| TTFT | 890ms | 6995ms |
| Latency | 890ms | 18829ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 34.3 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 40.5 | 62.0 |
| Intelligence | 34.2 | 39.4 |
| Coding | 32.0 | 32.8 |
| Math | 48.0 | 82.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 66.4% | 83.0% |
| MMLU Pro | 79.4% | 87.5% |
| HLE | 6.1% | 22.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 56.2% | 81.0% |
| AIME 2025 | 48.0% | 82.7% |
| SciCode | 35.4% | 40.7% |
| LCR | 36.3% | 59.0% |
| IFBench | 54.6% | 69.9% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 94.2% | 85.4% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 30.3% | 28.8% |
Key Takeaways
M2.1 offers the best value at $0.30/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
M2.1 has the strongest reasoning profile with a 62.0 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
M2.1 reaches a 32.8 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
GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
M2.1
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
