ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3 Coder Next vs MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.6V

GLM-4.6V comes out ahead, 59 to 51 and 48 on our weighted score.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 Coder Next

    Released Feb 3, 2026

    51/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.20 / $1.20
    • Context262K
  2. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M2.1

    Released Dec 23, 2025

    48/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context205K
  3. Our pick

    Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.6V

    Released Dec 8, 2025

    59/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context128K
01 — Verdict

GLM-4.6V is our pick

GLM-4.6V is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Qwen3 Coder Next (51) and MiniMax-M2.1 (48). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen3 Coder Next wins on 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 priceQwen3 Coder Next and GLM-4.6VQwen3 Coder Next $0.45 · GLM-4.6V $0.45 · MiniMax-M2.1 $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 Coder NextQwen3 Coder Next 262,144 · MiniMax-M2.1 204,800 · GLM-4.6V 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGLM-4.6VQwen3 Coder Next: Text · MiniMax-M2.1: Text · GLM-4.6V: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 Coder NextMiniMax-M2.1GLM-4.6V
Price50%666366
Inputs & features30%353570
Context window20%373224
Overall100%51/10048/10059/100

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 Coder Next vs MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.6V specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 Coder NextAlibaba (Qwen)MiniMax-M2.1MiniMaxGLM-4.6VZ.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.20 (best)$0.30$0.30
Output$1.20$1.20$0.90 (best)
Cached input—$0.03—
Blended (3:1)$0.45 (best)$0.525$0.45 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)204,800 tokens128,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningNoYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenOpen
API model ID—MiniMax-M2.1glm-4.6v
API providers1113 (best)10
ReleasedFeb 3, 2026Dec 23, 2025Dec 8, 2025
Knowledge cutoffSep 2025—Apr 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 Coder Next$4.40
  • MiniMax-M2.1$5.40
  • GLM-4.6V$4.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 Coder Next, MiniMax-M2.1 or GLM-4.6V?

GLM-4.6V is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Qwen3 Coder Next (51) and MiniMax-M2.1 (48). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen3 Coder Next wins on 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, Qwen3 Coder Next, MiniMax-M2.1 or GLM-4.6V?

Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.20 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). GLM-4.6V costs $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); MiniMax-M2.1 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 $0.45 per million tokens for Qwen3 Coder Next versus $0.45 for GLM-4.6V (1× as much) and $0.525 for MiniMax-M2.1 (1.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen3 Coder Next has not been scored yet, MiniMax-M2.1 has not been scored yet and GLM-4.6V has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 Coder Next, MiniMax-M2.1 and GLM-4.6V 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 Coder Next has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.1 and 128,000 for GLM-4.6V. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 Coder Next up to 65,536, MiniMax-M2.1 up to 131,072, GLM-4.6V up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 Coder Next accepts text; MiniMax-M2.1 accepts text; GLM-4.6V accepts text, images and video. GLM-4.6V handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 Coder Next is the newest, released Feb 3, 2026. MiniMax-M2.1 came out Dec 23, 2025; GLM-4.6V came out Dec 8, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 Coder Next Sep 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.