Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen3 Coder Next

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 M2.5 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Has reasoning mode

Qwen3 Coder Next wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
Price Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.5
Context Window
Qwen3 Coder Next
Speed
Qwen3 Coder Next

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.5Qwen3 Coder Next
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.5Qwen3 Coder Next
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedFeb 2026Feb 2026

MiniMax M2.5 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3 Coder Next Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.5 has cheaper input pricing at $0.12/M tokens. Qwen3 Coder Next has cheaper output pricing at $0.75/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 37.4, compared to Qwen3 Coder Next's score of 22.9.
MiniMax M2.5 has a 196,608 token context window, while Qwen3 Coder Next has a 262,144 token context window.
MiniMax M2.5 does not support vision. Qwen3 Coder Next does not support vision.