Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M2.1 vs Qwen3 Coder Flash

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

115 out of our 496 tracked models have had a price change in March.

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

New

Stop Googling APIs — let your agent choose

Our upcoming API Finder MCP server helps AI agents discover and compare APIs for any task.

Key Takeaways

MiniMax M2.1 wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math

Qwen3 Coder Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Larger context window
Price Advantage
MiniMax M2.1
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.1
Context Window
Qwen3 Coder Flash
Speed
MiniMax M2.1

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

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

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.1Qwen3 Coder Flash
LicenseOpen SourceProprietary
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedDec 2025Sep 2025

MiniMax M2.1 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3 Coder Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare MiniMax M2.1 with:

Compare Qwen3 Coder Flash with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3 Coder Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.20/M tokens. MiniMax M2.1 has cheaper output pricing at $0.95/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 32.8, compared to Qwen3 Coder Flash's score of N/A.
MiniMax M2.1 has a 196,608 token context window, while Qwen3 Coder Flash has a 1,000,000 token context window.
MiniMax M2.1 does not support vision. Qwen3 Coder Flash does not support vision.