Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M2.7 vs Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16

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 M2.7 wins:

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

Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16 wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
Price Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Context Window
Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16
Speed
MiniMax M2.7

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.7Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.7Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedMar 2026Unknown

MiniMax M2.7 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16 Modalities

Input
Output

Frequently Asked Questions

MiniMax M2.7 has cheaper input pricing at $0.30/M tokens. Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16 has cheaper output pricing at $0.90/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.7 has a 204,800 token context window, while Qwen3 Coder 480B Instruct BF16 has a 262,144 token context window.