Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Arcee AI
vs
Minimax
Minimax

Coder Large vs MiniMax M2.7

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

Coder Large wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens

MiniMax M2.7 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports tool calls
Price Advantage
Coder Large
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Context Window
MiniMax M2.7
Speed
MiniMax M2.7

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureCoder LargeMiniMax M2.7
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyCoder LargeMiniMax M2.7
LicenseOpen SourceProprietary
AuthorArcee AIMinimax
ReleasedMay 2025Mar 2026

Coder Large Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

MiniMax M2.7 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Coder Large with:

Compare MiniMax M2.7 with:

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.7 has cheaper input pricing at $0.30/M tokens. Coder Large has cheaper output pricing at $0.80/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 41.9, compared to Coder Large's score of N/A.
Coder Large has a 32,768 token context window, while MiniMax M2.7 has a 204,800 token context window.
Coder Large does not support vision. MiniMax M2.7 does not support vision.