MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5 Plus vs Seed 2.0 Code
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.5 Plus 59, Seed 2.0 Code 57, MiniMax-M2.5 48). The right pick depends on what you value most.
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.5
48/100- ECI146.7
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context205K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 Plus
59/100- ECI146.8
- Price$0.40 / $2.40
- Context1M
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Code
57/100- ECI—
- Price$0.475 / $2.37
- Context262K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3.5 Plus 59/100, Seed 2.0 Code 57/100, MiniMax-M2.5 48/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: MiniMax-M2.5 on price and Qwen3.5 Plus 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 priceMiniMax-M2.5MiniMax-M2.5 $0.525 · Qwen3.5 Plus $0.90 · Seed 2.0 Code $0.95 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 PlusQwen3.5 Plus 1,000,000 · Seed 2.0 Code 262,144 · MiniMax-M2.5 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 Plus and Seed 2.0 CodeMiniMax-M2.5: Text · Qwen3.5 Plus: Text, Images, Video · Seed 2.0 Code: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingMiniMax-M2.5Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | MiniMax-M2.5 | Qwen3.5 Plus | Seed 2.0 Code |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 63 | 52 | 51 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 70 | 80 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 60 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 48/100 | 59/100 | 57/100 |
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 | MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax | Qwen3.5 PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 146.7 | 146.8 (best) | — |
| ECI rank | #66 of 148 | #65 of 148 (best) | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 84.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 86.7% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 25.4% | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.30 (best) | $0.40 | $0.475 |
| Output | $1.20 (best) | $2.40 | $2.37 |
| Cached input | $0.03 (best) | — | $0.095 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.525 (best) | $0.90 | $0.95 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Over 32K: $0.712 / $3.56 |
| Price source | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API | Official Alibaba API | Official Volcengine Ark API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | MiniMax-M2.5 | qwen3.5-plus | doubao-seed-2-0-code-preview-260215 |
| API providers | 21 (best) | 10 | 10 |
| Released | Feb 12, 2026 | Feb 16, 2026 | Feb 14, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Apr 2025 | — |
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$5.40
- Qwen3.5 Plus$8.80
- Seed 2.0 Code$9.50
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiniMax-M2.5, Qwen3.5 Plus or Seed 2.0 Code?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3.5 Plus 59/100, Seed 2.0 Code 57/100, MiniMax-M2.5 48/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: MiniMax-M2.5 on price and Qwen3.5 Plus 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, MiniMax-M2.5, Qwen3.5 Plus or Seed 2.0 Code?
MiniMax-M2.5 is cheaper at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). Qwen3.5 Plus costs $0.40 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Seed 2.0 Code costs $0.475 input / $2.37 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.525 per million tokens for MiniMax-M2.5 versus $0.90 for Qwen3.5 Plus (1.7× as much) and $0.95 for Seed 2.0 Code (1.8× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiniMax-M2.5 has an ECI of 146.7, Qwen3.5 Plus has an ECI of 146.8 and Seed 2.0 Code has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M2.5, Qwen3.5 Plus and Seed 2.0 Code 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?
Qwen3.5 Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Seed 2.0 Code and 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.5. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M2.5 up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 Plus up to 65,536, Seed 2.0 Code up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiniMax-M2.5 accepts text; Qwen3.5 Plus accepts text, images and video; Seed 2.0 Code accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 Plus handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiniMax-M2.5 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Plus and Seed 2.0 Code is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the newest, released Feb 16, 2026. Seed 2.0 Code came out Feb 14, 2026; MiniMax-M2.5 came out Feb 12, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.5 Plus Apr 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.
Related comparisons
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs GPT-5.4 nanoOpenAI · ECI 145.8
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek · ECI 146.3
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- Qwen3.5 Plus vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- Qwen3.5 Plus vs Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI · ECI 148.0
- Qwen3.5 Plus vs GLM-5Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 145.8
