MiniMax-M2.7 vs Laguna S 2.1
Laguna S 2.1 comes out ahead, 69 to 48 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.7
48/100- ECI145.9
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context205K
- Our pick
PoolsideLaguna S 2.1
69/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.20
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Laguna S 2.1 is our pick
Laguna S 2.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against MiniMax-M2.7 (48). It leads on price 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 priceLaguna S 2.1Laguna S 2.1 $0.125 · MiniMax-M2.7 $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextLaguna S 2.1Laguna S 2.1 1,048,576 · MiniMax-M2.7 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMiniMax-M2.7: Text · Laguna S 2.1: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | MiniMax-M2.7 | Laguna S 2.1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 63 | 93 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 48/100 | 69/100 |
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-M2.7MiniMax | Laguna S 2.1Poolside |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.9 | — |
| ECI rank | #73 of 148 | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.10 (best) |
| Output | $1.20 | $0.20 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.06 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.525 | $0.125 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API | Median of 4 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | MiniMax-M2.7 | poolside/laguna-s-2.1 |
| API providers | 29 (best) | 6 |
| Released | Mar 18, 2026 | Jul 21, 2026 |
| 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
- Laguna S 2.1$1.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiniMax-M2.7 or Laguna S 2.1?
Laguna S 2.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against MiniMax-M2.7 (48). It leads on price 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-M2.7 or Laguna S 2.1?
Laguna S 2.1 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers; free on Poolside). 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 $0.125 per million tokens for Laguna S 2.1 versus $0.525 for MiniMax-M2.7 (4.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. MiniMax-M2.7 has an ECI of 145.9 and Laguna S 2.1 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M2.7 and Laguna S 2.1 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Laguna S 2.1 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.7. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M2.7 up to 131,072, Laguna S 2.1 up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiniMax-M2.7 accepts text; Laguna S 2.1 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?
Laguna S 2.1 is the newest, released Jul 21, 2026. MiniMax-M2.7 came out Mar 18, 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.
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
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Gemma 4 12B ITGoogle
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash FininclusionAI
