Key Takeaways
Llama 2 13B wins:
- Cheaper input tokens
- Cheaper output tokens
MiniMax M2.5 wins:
- Larger context window
- Faster response time
- Higher intelligence benchmark
- Better at coding
Price Advantage
Llama 2 13B
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Context Window
MiniMax M2.5
Speed
MiniMax M2.5
Pricing Comparison
Price Comparison
| Metric | Llama 2 13B | MiniMax M2.5 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input (per 1M tokens) | $0.20 | $0.27 | Llama 2 13B |
| Output (per 1M tokens) | $0.20 | $0.95 | Llama 2 13B |
| Cache Read (per 1M) | $0.10 | $0.03 | MiniMax M2.5 |
Using a 3:1 input/output ratio, Llama 2 13B is 55% cheaper overall.
Llama 2 13B Providers
No provider data available
MiniMax M2.5 Providers
No provider data available
Benchmark Comparison
3
Benchmarks Compared
0
Llama 2 13B Wins
0
MiniMax M2.5 Wins
Benchmark Scores
| Benchmark | Llama 2 13B | MiniMax M2.5 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Overall intelligence score | - | 41.9 | - |
Coding Index Code generation & understanding | - | 37.4 | - |
GPQA Graduate-level science | - | 84.8 | - |
MiniMax M2.5 significantly outperforms in coding benchmarks.
Cost vs Quality
X-axis:
Y-axis:
Loading chart...
Other models
Context & Performance
Context Window
Llama 2 13B
N/A
tokens
MiniMax M2.5
196,608
tokens
Speed Performance
| Metric | Llama 2 13B | MiniMax M2.5 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tokens/second | N/A | 38.9 tok/s | |
| Time to First Token | N/A | 2.11s |
Capabilities
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Llama 2 13B | MiniMax M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Tool/Function Calls | ||
| Reasoning Mode | ||
| Audio Input | ||
| Audio Output | ||
| PDF Input | ||
| Prompt Caching | ||
| Web Search |
License & Release
| Property | Llama 2 13B | MiniMax M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Author | Meta-llama | Minimax |
| Released | Unknown | Feb 2026 |
Llama 2 13B Modalities
Input
Output
MiniMax M2.5 Modalities
Input
text
Output
text