MiniMax-M2.7 vs DeepSeek V3 0324
MiniMax-M2.7 comes out ahead, 61 to 54 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek V3 0324 is 23% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.7
61/100- ECI145.9
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context205K
DeepSeekDeepSeek V3 0324
54/100- ECI135.9
- Price$0.24 / $0.90
- Context164K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
MiniMax-M2.7 is our pick
MiniMax-M2.7 is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against DeepSeek V3 0324 (54). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek V3 0324 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityMiniMax-M2.7Capabilities Index (ECI): MiniMax-M2.7 145.9 · DeepSeek V3 0324 135.9
- Lowest priceDeepSeek V3 0324DeepSeek V3 0324 $0.405 · MiniMax-M2.7 $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiniMax-M2.7MiniMax-M2.7 204,800 · DeepSeek V3 0324 163,840 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMiniMax-M2.7: Text · DeepSeek V3 0324: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | MiniMax-M2.7 | DeepSeek V3 0324 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 73 | 60 |
| Price | 25% | 63 | 68 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 28 |
| Overall | 100% | 61/100 | 54/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | MiniMax-M2.7MiniMax | DeepSeek V3 0324DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.9 (best) | 135.9 |
| ECI rank | #73 of 148 (best) | #114 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 67.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 37.8% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.24 (best) |
| Output | $1.20 | $0.90 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.06 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.525 | $0.405 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API | Median of 5 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens (best) | 163,840 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 163,840 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | MiniMax-M2.7 | — |
| API providers | 29 (best) | 5 |
| Released | Mar 18, 2026 | Mar 24, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
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$5.40
- DeepSeek V3 0324$4.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiniMax-M2.7 or DeepSeek V3 0324?
MiniMax-M2.7 is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against DeepSeek V3 0324 (54). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek V3 0324 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.7 or DeepSeek V3 0324?
DeepSeek V3 0324 is cheaper at $0.24 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). MiniMax-M2.7 costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.405 per million tokens for DeepSeek V3 0324 versus $0.525 for MiniMax-M2.7 (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
MiniMax-M2.7 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): MiniMax-M2.7 145.9 (#73 of 148) and DeepSeek V3 0324 135.9 (#114 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (138.2–148.0 vs 132.4–138.0), so the gap is a real one.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M2.7 and DeepSeek V3 0324 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, MiniMax-M2.7 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax-M2.7 has the largest context window at 204,800 tokens, against 163,840 for DeepSeek V3 0324. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M2.7 up to 131,072, DeepSeek V3 0324 up to 163,840 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiniMax-M2.7 accepts text; DeepSeek V3 0324 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
MiniMax-M2.7 is the newest, released Mar 18, 2026. DeepSeek V3 0324 came out Mar 24, 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
- Add GPT-5.4 nanoThree-way comparison
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs GPT-5.4 nanoOpenAI · ECI 145.8
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 143.9
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek · ECI 146.3
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
- DeepSeek V3 0324 vs Qwen3 8BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 136.2
- DeepSeek V3 0324 vs GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI · ECI 135.0
