MiniMax-M2.7 vs Mistral Small 3.2
Too close to call on our weighted score (MiniMax-M2.7 61, Mistral Small 3.2 60). The right pick depends on what you value most.
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.7
61/100- ECI145.9
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context205K
Mistral AIMistral Small 3.2
60/100- ECI131.7
- Price$0.10 / $0.30
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (MiniMax-M2.7 61/100, Mistral Small 3.2 60/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: MiniMax-M2.7 for raw capability and Mistral Small 3.2 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 · Mistral Small 3.2 131.7
- Lowest priceMistral Small 3.2Mistral Small 3.2 $0.15 · MiniMax-M2.7 $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiniMax-M2.7MiniMax-M2.7 204,800 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMistral Small 3.2MiniMax-M2.7: Text · Mistral Small 3.2: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | MiniMax-M2.7 | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 73 | 55 |
| Price | 25% | 63 | 89 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 50 |
| Context window | 10% | 32 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 61/100 | 60/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | MiniMax-M2.7MiniMax | Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 145.9 (best) | 131.7 |
| ECI rank | #73 of 148 (best) | #123 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 49.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 30.3% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.10 (best) |
| Output | $1.20 | $0.30 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.06 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.525 | $0.15 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API | Official Mistral API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 204,800 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 16,384 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| 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 | mistral-small-2506 |
| API providers | 29 (best) | 6 |
| Released | Mar 18, 2026 | Jun 20, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Mar 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-M2.7$5.40
- Mistral Small 3.2$1.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiniMax-M2.7 or Mistral Small 3.2?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (MiniMax-M2.7 61/100, Mistral Small 3.2 60/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: MiniMax-M2.7 for raw capability and Mistral Small 3.2 on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.7 or Mistral Small 3.2?
Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). 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 $0.15 per million tokens for Mistral Small 3.2 versus $0.525 for MiniMax-M2.7 (3.5× 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 Mistral Small 3.2 131.7 (#123 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (138.2–148.0 vs 126.6–133.9), 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 Mistral Small 3.2 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 128,000 for Mistral Small 3.2. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M2.7 up to 131,072, Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiniMax-M2.7 accepts text; Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images. Mistral Small 3.2 handles the widest range of inputs.
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. Mistral Small 3.2 came out Jun 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Mistral Small 3.2 Mar 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
- Mistral Small 3.2 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle · ECI 133.9
- Mistral Small 3.2 vs Qwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 136.2
