ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs DeepSeek OCR 2

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B comes out ahead, 56 to 41 and 32 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek OCR 2 is 23% cheaper per token.

  1. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed

    Released Feb 13, 2026

    41/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.60 / $2.40
    • Context205K
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

    Released Feb 15, 2026

    56/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
  3. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek OCR 2

    Released Jan 27, 2026

    32/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.89 / $1.47
    • Context8K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is our pick

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (41) and DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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 priceDeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek OCR 2 $1.03 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed $1.05 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 204,800 · DeepSeek OCR 2 8,192 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 397B-A17BMiniMax-M2.5-highspeed: Text · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · DeepSeek OCR 2: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniMax-M2.5-highspeedQwen3.5 397B-A17BDeepSeek OCR 2
Price50%494449
Inputs & features30%359025
Context window20%32370
Overall100%41/10056/10032/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B vs DeepSeek OCR 2 specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniMax-M2.5-highspeedMiniMaxQwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen)DeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—146.7—
ECI rank—#67 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—86.4%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—31.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—88.9%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60 (best)$0.60 (best)$0.89
Output$2.40$3.60$1.47 (best)
Cached input$0.06——
Blended (3:1)$1.05$1.35$1.03 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) APIOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens262,144 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYesYesNo
Tool callingYesYesNo
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenOpen
API model IDMiniMax-M2.5-highspeedqwen3.5-397b-a17b—
API providers723 (best)2
ReleasedFeb 13, 2026Feb 15, 2026Jan 27, 2026
Knowledge cutoff———
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed$10.80
  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
  • DeepSeek OCR 2$11.83
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B or DeepSeek OCR 2?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (41) and DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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, MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B or DeepSeek OCR 2?

DeepSeek OCR 2 is cheaper at $0.89 input / $1.47 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed costs $0.60 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price); Qwen3.5 397B-A17B costs $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.03 per million tokens for DeepSeek OCR 2 versus $1.05 for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (1× as much) and $1.35 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (1.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed has not been scored yet, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has an ECI of 146.7 and DeepSeek OCR 2 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B and DeepSeek OCR 2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that DeepSeek OCR 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed and 8,192 for DeepSeek OCR 2. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536, DeepSeek OCR 2 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed accepts text; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video; DeepSeek OCR 2 accepts text and images. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the newest, released Feb 15, 2026. MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed came out Feb 13, 2026; DeepSeek OCR 2 came out Jan 27, 2026.

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.