Qwen3 Max vs MiniMax-M2.7
MiniMax-M2.7 comes out ahead, 61 to 50 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 Max
50/100- ECI142.4
- Price$1.20 / $6.00
- Context262K
- Our pick
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.7
61/100- ECI145.9
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context205K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
MiniMax-M2.7 is our pick
MiniMax-M2.7 is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Qwen3 Max (50). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. Qwen3 Max wins on 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 · Qwen3 Max 142.4
- Lowest priceMiniMax-M2.7MiniMax-M2.7 $0.525 · Qwen3 Max $2.40 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3 MaxQwen3 Max 262,144 · MiniMax-M2.7 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3 Max: Text · MiniMax-M2.7: Text
- Self-hostingMiniMax-M2.7Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3 Max | MiniMax-M2.7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 68 | 73 |
| Price | 25% | 32 | 63 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 25 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 37 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 50/100 | 61/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) | MiniMax-M2.7MiniMax |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 142.4 | 145.9 (best) |
| ECI rank | #91 of 148 | #73 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 72.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 19.0% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 73.3% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 48.8% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.20 | $0.30 (best) |
| Output | $6.00 | $1.20 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $0.06 |
| Blended (3:1) | $2.40 | $0.525 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 204,800 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3-max | MiniMax-M2.7 |
| API providers | 16 | 29 (best) |
| Released | Sep 23, 2025 | Mar 18, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen3 Max$24.00
- MiniMax-M2.7$5.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3 Max or MiniMax-M2.7?
MiniMax-M2.7 is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Qwen3 Max (50). It leads on capability, price and inputs & features. Qwen3 Max wins on context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 Max or MiniMax-M2.7?
MiniMax-M2.7 is cheaper at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). Qwen3 Max costs $1.20 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.525 per million tokens for MiniMax-M2.7 versus $2.40 for Qwen3 Max (4.6× 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 Qwen3 Max 142.4 (#91 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.2–148.0 vs 140.0–144.6), so treat the gap as small.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 Max and MiniMax-M2.7 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?
Qwen3 Max has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.7. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 Max up to 65,536, MiniMax-M2.7 up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3 Max accepts text; MiniMax-M2.7 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
MiniMax-M2.7 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3 Max is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiniMax-M2.7 is the newest, released Mar 18, 2026. Qwen3 Max came out Sep 23, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 Max 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.
Related comparisons
- Add Claude Haiku 4.5Three-way comparison
- Qwen3 Max vs Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic · ECI 142.4
- Qwen3 Max vs Mistral Medium 3.5Mistral AI · ECI 141.4
- Qwen3 Max vs Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle · ECI 145.3
- Qwen3 Max vs GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 143.5
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs GPT-5.4 nanoOpenAI · ECI 145.8
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 143.9
