Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)

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 0728 (thinking) wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
Price Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Context Window
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Speed
MiniMax M2.5

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.5Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.5Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
LicenseOpen SourceProprietary
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedFeb 2026Sep 2025

MiniMax M2.5 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare MiniMax M2.5 with:

Compare Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) with:

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.5 has cheaper input pricing at $0.15/M tokens. Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) 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 0728 (thinking)'s score of N/A.
MiniMax M2.5 has a 196,608 token context window, while Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) has a 1,000,000 token context window.
MiniMax M2.5 does not support vision. Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) does not support vision.