Model Comparison
M2
vs. Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · MiniMax, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) 9 metric wins Strongest on: Intelligence, Coding, GPQA
Best Value
M2
100.0 value score
56.6 reasoning / $0.52/1M
Lowest Price
M2
$0.30/1M input price
Best Reasoning
M2
56.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning)
34.9 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 has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Speed gap
M2 generates about 1.5x as many tokens per second as Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
M2 leads Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) by 6.6 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) leads M2 by 5.7 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) wins 9 measurable categories, including Intelligence, Coding, GPQA, HLE.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
M2
MiniMax
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Mi M2 | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.20/1M | $2.40/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.52/1M | $0.82/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | MiniMax | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Oct 26, 2025 | Feb 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 125.7 tok/s | 83.6 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1097ms | 1372ms |
| Latency | 17013ms | 25306ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 56.3 |
| Reasoning Score | 56.6 | 50.0 |
| Intelligence | 36.1 | 42.1 |
| Coding | 29.2 | 34.9 |
| Math | 78.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 77.7% | 85.8% |
| MMLU Pro | 82.0% | — |
| HLE | 12.5% | 22.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 82.6% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 78.3% | — |
| SciCode | 36.1% | 39.5% |
| LCR | 61.0% | 67.3% |
| IFBench | 72.3% | 75.6% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 86.8% | 93.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 25.8% | 32.6% |
Key Takeaways
M2 offers the best value at $0.30/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
M2 has the strongest reasoning profile with a 56.6 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning) reaches a 34.9 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
M2
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3.5 27B (Reasoning)
- Code generation
- Software development
Recommended Comparisons
Popular alternatives
