Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B

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

MiniMax M1 wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Better at math
  • Has reasoning mode

Qwen3.5 397B A17B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports vision
Price Advantage
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Context Window
MiniMax M1
Speed
Qwen3.5 397B A17B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M1Qwen3.5 397B A17B
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedJun 2025Feb 2026

MiniMax M1 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3.5 397B A17B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.5 397B A17B has cheaper input pricing at $0.39/M tokens. Qwen3.5 397B A17B has cheaper output pricing at $0.90/M tokens.
Qwen3.5 397B A17B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 37.4, compared to MiniMax M1's score of 14.1.
MiniMax M1 has a 1,000,000 token context window, while Qwen3.5 397B A17B has a 262,144 token context window.
MiniMax M1 does not support vision. Qwen3.5 397B A17B supports vision.