MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs MiniMax-M2 Her vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Too close to call on our weighted score (MiMo-V2.5-Pro 54, Qwen3 Coder Next 51, MiniMax-M2 Her 45). The right pick depends on what you value most.
XiaomiMiMo-V2.5-Pro
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.435 / $0.87
- Context1.05M
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2 Her
45/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context66K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 Coder Next
51/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $1.20
- Context262K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (MiMo-V2.5-Pro 54/100, Qwen3 Coder Next 51/100, MiniMax-M2 Her 45/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 Coder Next on price and MiMo-V2.5-Pro for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwen3 Coder NextQwen3 Coder Next $0.45 · MiniMax-M2 Her $0.525 · MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.544 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.5-ProMiMo-V2.5-Pro 1,048,576 · Qwen3 Coder Next 262,144 · MiniMax-M2 Her 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMiMo-V2.5-Pro: Text · MiniMax-M2 Her: Text · Qwen3 Coder Next: Text
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen3 Coder NextPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | MiniMax-M2 Her | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 62 | 63 | 66 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 12 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 54/100 | 45/100 | 51/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | MiMo-V2.5-ProXiaomi | MiniMax-M2 HerMiniMax | Qwen3 Coder NextAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.435 | $0.30 | $0.20 (best) |
| Output | $0.87 (best) | $1.20 | $1.20 |
| Cached input | $0.0036 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.544 | $0.525 | $0.45 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Xiaomi API | Median of 4 providers | Median of 11 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 2,048 tokens | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | mimo-v2.5-pro | — | — |
| API providers | 20 (best) | 4 | 11 |
| Released | Apr 22, 2026 | Jan 23, 2026 | Feb 3, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Dec 2024 | — | Sep 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro$6.09
- MiniMax-M2 Her$5.40
- Qwen3 Coder Next$4.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiMo-V2.5-Pro, MiniMax-M2 Her or Qwen3 Coder Next?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (MiMo-V2.5-Pro 54/100, Qwen3 Coder Next 51/100, MiniMax-M2 Her 45/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 Coder Next on price and MiMo-V2.5-Pro for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5-Pro, MiniMax-M2 Her or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.20 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). MiniMax-M2 Her costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers); MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs $0.435 input / $0.87 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.45 per million tokens for Qwen3 Coder Next versus $0.525 for MiniMax-M2 Her (1.2× as much) and $0.544 for MiMo-V2.5-Pro (1.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has not been scored yet, MiniMax-M2 Her has not been scored yet and Qwen3 Coder Next has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiMo-V2.5-Pro, MiniMax-M2 Her and Qwen3 Coder Next yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3 Coder Next and 65,536 for MiniMax-M2 Her. Maximum output per response: MiMo-V2.5-Pro up to 131,072, MiniMax-M2 Her up to 2,048, Qwen3 Coder Next up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts text; MiniMax-M2 Her accepts text; Qwen3 Coder Next accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen3 Coder Next publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; MiniMax-M2 Her is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the newest, released Apr 22, 2026. Qwen3 Coder Next came out Feb 3, 2026; MiniMax-M2 Her came out Jan 23, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: MiMo-V2.5-Pro Dec 2024, Qwen3 Coder Next Sep 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
