Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Qwen
Qwen

MiniMax M2.7 vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

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:

  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Supports vision
Price Advantage
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Context Window
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Speed
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.7Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.7Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorMinimaxQwen
ReleasedMar 2026Feb 2026

MiniMax M2.7 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has cheaper input pricing at $0.15/M tokens. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has cheaper output pricing at $0.90/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 41.9, compared to Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's score of 16.8.
MiniMax M2.7 has a 204,800 token context window, while Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has a 262,144 token context window.