Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M2.1 vs Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)

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 M2.1 wins:

  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math
  • Has reasoning mode

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
Price Advantage
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.1
Context Window
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Speed
MiniMax M2.1

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.1Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.1Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedDec 2025Jul 2025

MiniMax M2.1 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) has cheaper input pricing at $0.22/M tokens. Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) 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 Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)'s score of 24.6.
MiniMax M2.1 has a 196,608 token context window, while Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) has a 262,144 token context window.
MiniMax M2.1 does not support vision. Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) does not support vision.