Model Comparison
M2.7
vs. Qwen2.5 Turbo
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · MiniMax, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen2.5 Turbo 7 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen2.5 Turbo
100.0 value score
29.9 reasoning / $0.09/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen2.5 Turbo
$0.05/1M input price
Best Reasoning
M2.7
55.0 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
Qwen2.5 Turbo has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen2.5 Turbo is 6.0x cheaper on input tokens than M2.7.
Speed gap
Qwen2.5 Turbo generates about 1.6x as many tokens per second as M2.7.
Reasoning gap
M2.7 leads Qwen2.5 Turbo by 25.1 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen2.5 Turbo wins 7 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.
M2.7
MiniMax
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen2.5 Turbo
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Mi M2.7 | Top Pick Al Qwen2.5 Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.05/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.20/1M | $0.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.52/1M | $0.09/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | MiniMax | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Mar 18, 2026 | Nov 18, 2024 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 50.7 tok/s | 83.3 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1520ms | 1224ms |
| Latency | 50050ms | 1224ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 30.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 55.0 | 29.9 |
| Intelligence | 49.6 | 12.0 |
| Coding | 41.9 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 87.4% | 41.0% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 63.3% |
| HLE | 28.1% | 4.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 16.3% |
| MATH 500 | — | 80.5% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 12.0% |
| SciCode | 47.0% | 15.3% |
| LCR | 68.7% | — |
| IFBench | 75.7% | — |
| TAU-bench v2 | 84.8% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 39.4% | — |
Key Takeaways
Qwen2.5 Turbo offers the best value at $0.05/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
M2.7 has the strongest reasoning profile with a 55.0 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
M2.7
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen2.5 Turbo
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
