Model Comparison
MiniMax M1 80K vs QwQ-32B-PreviewWhich is better in 2026?
MiniMax M1 80K significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. QwQ-32B-Preview is 5.9x cheaper per token.
Verdict: MiniMax M1 80K vs QwQ-32B-Preview — which is better?
MiniMax M1 80K (by MiniMax) and QwQ-32B-Preview (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
MiniMax M1 80K outperforms in 4 benchmarks (AIME 2024, GPQA, LiveCodeBench, MATH-500), while QwQ-32B-Preview is better at 0 benchmarks. MiniMax M1 80K significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, QwQ-32B-Preview is roughly 5.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
MiniMax M1 80K also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose MiniMax M1 80K if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 4 of 4 shared benchmarks
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jun 2025
Choose QwQ-32B-Preview if…
- cost matters — it's about 5.9x cheaper per token
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
MiniMax M1 80K outperforms in 4 benchmarks (AIME 2024, GPQA, LiveCodeBench, MATH-500), while QwQ-32B-Preview is better at 0 benchmarks.
MiniMax M1 80K significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, MiniMax M1 80K ($0.55/1M tokens) is 3.7x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.15/1M tokens).
For output processing, MiniMax M1 80K ($2.20/1M tokens) is 11.0x more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview ($0.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, MiniMax M1 80K is more expensive than QwQ-32B-Preview.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
MiniMax M1 80K has 423.5B more parameters than QwQ-32B-Preview, making it 1303.1% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
MiniMax M1 80K accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to QwQ-32B-Preview's 32,768 tokens. MiniMax M1 80K can generate longer responses up to 40,000 tokens, while QwQ-32B-Preview is limited to 32,768 tokens.
License
Usage and distribution terms
MiniMax M1 80K is licensed under MIT, while QwQ-32B-Preview uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
MIT
Open weights
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
MiniMax M1 80K was released on 2025-06-16, while QwQ-32B-Preview was released on 2024-11-28.
MiniMax M1 80K is 7 months newer than QwQ-32B-Preview.
Jun 16, 2025
1.0 years ago
6mo newerNov 28, 2024
1.6 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
QwQ-32B-Preview has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-28, while MiniMax M1 80K's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm QwQ-32B-Preview's training data extends to 2024-11-28, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiniMax M1 80K's cutoff date.
—
Nov 2024
Provider Availability
MiniMax M1 80K is available from Novita. QwQ-32B-Preview is available from DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks, Together.
MiniMax M1 80K
QwQ-32B-Preview
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
MiniMax M1 80K
View detailsMiniMax
QwQ-32B-Preview
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about MiniMax M1 80K vs QwQ-32B-Preview.