ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.5 Plus vs GLM-4.6V vs MiniMax-M2.5

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.5 Plus 59, GLM-4.6V 59, MiniMax-M2.5 48). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 Plus

    Released Feb 16, 2026

    59/100
    • ECI146.8
    • Price$0.40 / $2.40
    • Context1M
  2. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.6V

    Released Dec 8, 2025

    59/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context128K
  3. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M2.5

    Released Feb 12, 2026

    48/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context205K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3.5 Plus 59/100, GLM-4.6V 59/100, MiniMax-M2.5 48/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.6V on price and Qwen3.5 Plus for long inputs. 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 priceGLM-4.6VGLM-4.6V $0.45 · MiniMax-M2.5 $0.525 · Qwen3.5 Plus $0.90 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 PlusQwen3.5 Plus 1,000,000 · MiniMax-M2.5 204,800 · GLM-4.6V 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 Plus and GLM-4.6VQwen3.5 Plus: Text, Images, Video · GLM-4.6V: Text, Images, Video · MiniMax-M2.5: Text
  • Self-hostingGLM-4.6V and MiniMax-M2.5Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.5 PlusGLM-4.6VMiniMax-M2.5
Price50%526663
Inputs & features30%707035
Context window20%602432
Overall100%59/10059/10048/100

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.

Qwen3.5 Plus vs GLM-4.6V vs MiniMax-M2.5 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.5 PlusAlibaba (Qwen)GLM-4.6VZ.ai (Zhipu)MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)146.8 (best)—146.7
ECI rank#65 of 148 (best)—#66 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions84.9%——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics86.7%——
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions25.4%——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.40$0.30 (best)$0.30 (best)
Output$2.40$0.90 (best)$1.20
Cached input——$0.03
Blended (3:1)$0.90$0.45 (best)$0.525
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)128,000 tokens204,800 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoYesYesNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenOpen
API model IDqwen3.5-plusglm-4.6vMiniMax-M2.5
API providers101021 (best)
ReleasedFeb 16, 2026Dec 8, 2025Feb 12, 2026
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025Apr 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.

  • Qwen3.5 Plus$8.80
  • GLM-4.6V$4.80
  • MiniMax-M2.5$5.40
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.5 Plus, GLM-4.6V or MiniMax-M2.5?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3.5 Plus 59/100, GLM-4.6V 59/100, MiniMax-M2.5 48/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.6V on price and Qwen3.5 Plus for long inputs. 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, Qwen3.5 Plus, GLM-4.6V or MiniMax-M2.5?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). MiniMax-M2.5 costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price); Qwen3.5 Plus costs $0.40 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.45 per million tokens for GLM-4.6V versus $0.525 for MiniMax-M2.5 (1.2× as much) and $0.90 for Qwen3.5 Plus (2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen3.5 Plus has an ECI of 146.8, GLM-4.6V has not been scored yet and MiniMax-M2.5 has an ECI of 146.7.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 Plus, GLM-4.6V and MiniMax-M2.5 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?

Qwen3.5 Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.5 and 128,000 for GLM-4.6V. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 Plus up to 65,536, GLM-4.6V up to 32,768, MiniMax-M2.5 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.5 Plus accepts text, images and video; GLM-4.6V accepts text, images and video; MiniMax-M2.5 accepts text. Qwen3.5 Plus handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

GLM-4.6V and MiniMax-M2.5 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Plus is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 Plus is the newest, released Feb 16, 2026. MiniMax-M2.5 came out Feb 12, 2026; GLM-4.6V came out Dec 8, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.5 Plus Apr 2025, GLM-4.6V Apr 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.