Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Google
Google
vs
Minimax
Minimax

Gemini 2.5 Flash 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

Gemini 2.5 Flash wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision
  • Has reasoning mode

MiniMax M2.7 wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Context Window
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Speed
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureGemini 2.5 FlashMiniMax M2.7
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyGemini 2.5 FlashMiniMax M2.7
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
AuthorGoogleMinimax
ReleasedJun 2025Mar 2026

Gemini 2.5 Flash Modalities

Input
fileimagetextaudiovideo
Output
text

MiniMax M2.7 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Gemini 2.5 Flash with:

Compare MiniMax M2.7 with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Gemini 2.5 Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.30/M tokens. MiniMax M2.7 has cheaper output pricing at $1.20/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 41.9, compared to Gemini 2.5 Flash's score of 17.8.
Gemini 2.5 Flash has a 1,048,576 token context window, while MiniMax M2.7 has a 204,800 token context window.
Gemini 2.5 Flash supports vision. MiniMax M2.7 does not support vision.