Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen-Plus

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

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

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

MiniMax M2.5 wins:

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

Qwen-Plus wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
Price Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Context Window
Qwen-Plus
Speed
MiniMax M2.5

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.5Qwen-Plus
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.5Qwen-Plus
LicenseOpen SourceProprietary
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedFeb 2026Feb 2025

MiniMax M2.5 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen-Plus Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare MiniMax M2.5 with:

Compare Qwen-Plus with:

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.5 has cheaper input pricing at $0.15/M tokens. Qwen-Plus has cheaper output pricing at $0.78/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 37.4, compared to Qwen-Plus's score of N/A.
MiniMax M2.5 has a 196,608 token context window, while Qwen-Plus has a 1,000,000 token context window.
MiniMax M2.5 does not support vision. Qwen-Plus does not support vision.