ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed vs Hy4 preview vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B comes out ahead, 58 to 45 and 41 on our weighted score.

  1. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed

    Released Mar 18, 2026

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

    Hy4 preview

    Released Aug 28, 2026

    45/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.834 / $2.50
    • Context1.02M
  3. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 122B-A10B

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.40 / $3.20
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is our pick

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Hy4 preview (45) and MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed (41). It leads on inputs & features. Hy4 preview wins on 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 priceMiniMax-M2.7-highspeedMiniMax-M2.7-highspeed $1.05 · Qwen3.5 122B-A10B $1.10 · Hy4 preview $1.25 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextHy4 previewHy4 preview 1,024,000 · Qwen3.5 122B-A10B 262,144 · MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 122B-A10BMiniMax-M2.7-highspeed: Text · Hy4 preview: Text · Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniMax-M2.7-highspeedHy4 previewQwen3.5 122B-A10B
Price50%494548
Inputs & features30%353590
Context window20%326037
Overall100%41/10045/10058/100

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-M2.7-highspeed vs Hy4 preview vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniMax-M2.7-highspeedMiniMaxHy4 previewTencentQwen3.5 122B-A10BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.60$0.834$0.40 (best)
Output$2.40 (best)$2.50$3.20
Cached input$0.06$0.042 (best)—
Blended (3:1)$1.05 (best)$1.25$1.10
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) APIOfficial Tencent TokenHub APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens1,024,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)64,000 tokens65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningYesYeshighYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenOpen
API model IDMiniMax-M2.7-highspeedhy4-previewqwen3.5-122b-a10b
API providers141319 (best)
ReleasedMar 18, 2026Aug 28, 2026Feb 23, 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-M2.7-highspeed$10.80
  • Hy4 preview$13.34
  • Qwen3.5 122B-A10B$10.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed, Hy4 preview or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Hy4 preview (45) and MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed (41). It leads on inputs & features. Hy4 preview wins on 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-M2.7-highspeed, Hy4 preview or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?

MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed is cheaper at $0.60 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). Qwen3.5 122B-A10B costs $0.40 input / $3.20 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Hy4 preview costs $0.834 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Tencent TokenHub API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.05 per million tokens for MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed versus $1.10 for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B (1× as much) and $1.25 for Hy4 preview (1.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed has not been scored yet, Hy4 preview has not been scored yet and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed, Hy4 preview and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B 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?

Hy4 preview has the largest context window at 1,024,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B and 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed up to 131,072, Hy4 preview up to 64,000, Qwen3.5 122B-A10B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed accepts text; Hy4 preview accepts text; Qwen3.5 122B-A10B accepts text, images, audio and video. Qwen3.5 122B-A10B 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?

Hy4 preview is the newest, released Aug 28, 2026. MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed came out Mar 18, 2026; Qwen3.5 122B-A10B came out Feb 23, 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.