ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.4 nano

Qwen3.7 Flash comes out ahead, 79 to 68 and 61 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M2.7

    Released Mar 18, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI145.9
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context205K
    Full specs Remove MiniMax-M2.7
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Flash

    Released Jul 15, 2026

    79/100
    • ECI144.6
    • Price$0.03 / $0.13
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Flash

  3. OpenAI

    GPT-5.4 nano

    Released Mar 17, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI145.8
    • Price$0.20 / $1.25
    • Context400K
    Full specs Remove GPT-5.4 nano
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.7 Flash is our pick

Qwen3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against GPT-5.4 nano (68) and MiniMax-M2.7 (61). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityMiniMax-M2.7Capabilities Index (ECI): MiniMax-M2.7 145.9 · GPT-5.4 nano 145.8 · Qwen3.7 Flash 144.6
  • Lowest priceQwen3.7 FlashQwen3.7 Flash $0.055 · GPT-5.4 nano $0.463 · MiniMax-M2.7 $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.7 FlashQwen3.7 Flash 1,000,000 · GPT-5.4 nano 400,000 · MiniMax-M2.7 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.7 FlashMiniMax-M2.7: Text · Qwen3.7 Flash: Text, Images, Video · GPT-5.4 nano: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingMiniMax-M2.7Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniMax-M2.7Qwen3.7 FlashGPT-5.4 nano
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%737173
Price25%6310066
Inputs & features15%358070
Context window10%326044
Overall100%61/10079/10068/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.4 nano specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniMax-M2.7MiniMaxQwen3.7 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)GPT-5.4 nanoOpenAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)145.9 (best)144.6145.8
ECI rank#73 of 148 (best)#80 of 148#75 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—82.3% (best)78.5%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—19.3%44.9% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—86.7%87.8% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions——11.7%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30$0.03 (best)$0.20
Output$1.20$0.13 (best)$1.25
Cached input$0.06$0.003 (best)$0.02
Blended (3:1)$0.525$0.055 (best)$0.463
Long-context rateSame rateOver 32K: $0.10 / $0.40Same rate
Price sourceOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) APIOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial OpenAI API
Limits
Context window204,800 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)400,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)131,072 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYesYesYeslow · medium · high · xhigh
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryProprietary
API model IDMiniMax-M2.7qwen3.7-flashgpt-5.4-nano
API providers29 (best)1226
ReleasedMar 18, 2026Jul 15, 2026Mar 17, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——Aug 31, 2025
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$5.40
  • Qwen3.7 Flash$0.56
  • GPT-5.4 nano$4.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniMax-M2.7, Qwen3.7 Flash or GPT-5.4 nano?

Qwen3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against GPT-5.4 nano (68) and MiniMax-M2.7 (61). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.7, Qwen3.7 Flash or GPT-5.4 nano?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.13 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GPT-5.4 nano costs $0.20 input / $1.25 output per million tokens (official OpenAI 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 $0.055 per million tokens for Qwen3.7 Flash versus $0.463 for GPT-5.4 nano (8.4× as much) and $0.525 for MiniMax-M2.7 (9.5× 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), GPT-5.4 nano 145.8 (#75 of 148) and Qwen3.7 Flash 144.6 (#80 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.2–148.0 vs 143.2–147.7), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M2.7, Qwen3.7 Flash and GPT-5.4 nano 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. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 400,000 for GPT-5.4 nano and 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.7. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M2.7 up to 131,072, Qwen3.7 Flash up to 131,072, GPT-5.4 nano up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniMax-M2.7 accepts text; Qwen3.7 Flash accepts text, images and video; GPT-5.4 nano accepts text and images. Qwen3.7 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

MiniMax-M2.7 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Flash and GPT-5.4 nano is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.7 Flash is the newest, released Jul 15, 2026. MiniMax-M2.7 came out Mar 18, 2026; GPT-5.4 nano came out Mar 17, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-5.4 nano Aug 31, 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons