Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Nvidia
Nvidia

MiniMax M2.7 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1

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 M2.7 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 wins:

  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Context Window
MiniMax M2.7
Speed
MiniMax M2.7

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.7Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorMinimaxNvidia
ReleasedMar 2026Unknown

MiniMax M2.7 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 Modalities

Input
Output

Related Comparisons

Compare MiniMax M2.7 with:

Compare Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 with:

See all model comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.7 has cheaper input pricing at $0.30/M tokens. MiniMax M2.7 has cheaper output pricing at $1.20/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 41.9, compared to Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1's score of N/A.
MiniMax M2.7 has a 204,800 token context window, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 has a 128,000 token context window.
MiniMax M2.7 does not support vision. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 does not support vision.

Built by @aellman

Archive
Follow us:
Advertise | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026 68 Ventures, LLC. All rights reserved.