Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Meta-llama
Meta-llama
vs
Minimax
Minimax

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct vs MiniMax M2.1

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

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

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens

MiniMax M2.1 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
Llama 3.1 405B Instruct
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.1
Context Window
MiniMax M2.1
Speed
MiniMax M2.1

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureLlama 3.1 405B InstructMiniMax M2.1
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyLlama 3.1 405B InstructMiniMax M2.1
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMeta-llamaMinimax
ReleasedJul 2024Dec 2025

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

MiniMax M2.1 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.1 has cheaper input pricing at $0.27/M tokens. Llama 3.1 405B Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.90/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 32.8, compared to Llama 3.1 405B Instruct's score of 14.5.
Llama 3.1 405B Instruct has a 131,000 token context window, while MiniMax M2.1 has a 196,608 token context window.
Llama 3.1 405B Instruct does not support vision. MiniMax M2.1 does not support vision.