The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiniMax M2.1 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B

MiniMax M2.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 31.9 to -6.2.

MiniMax · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiniMax M2.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 31.9 to -6.2, ranking #108 overall.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, MiniMax M2.1 wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose MiniMax M2.1

  • overall performance matters — it scores 31.9 and ranks #108 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results

Choose Qwen3.5-0.8B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Mar 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
31.9
#108
-6.2
#361
32.2
#103
-3.4
#335
18.2
#69
-9.6
#182
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
4 of 4
0 of 4
Input price
$0.30 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
MiniMax M2.1
Qwen3.5-0.8B
27.5#98
-6.8#323
13.8#95
-9.7#192
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

25 reported for MiniMax M2.1 · 20 for Qwen3.5-0.8B

4 shared

MiniMax M2.1 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (AA-LCR, GPQA, IFBench, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen3.5-0.8B is better at 0 benchmarks.

MiniMax M2.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Sep 13 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

229.2B diff

MiniMax M2.1 has 229.2B more parameters than Qwen3.5-0.8B, making it 28650.0% larger.

MiniMax
MiniMax M2.1
230.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-0.8B
800,000,000parameters
230.0B
MiniMax M2.1
0.8B
Qwen3.5-0.8B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only MiniMax M2.1 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only MiniMax M2.1 specifies output context (1,000,000 tokens).

MiniMax
MiniMax M2.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output1,000,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.5-0.8B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sun Sep 13 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.5-0.8B supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniMax M2.1 does not.

Qwen3.5-0.8B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

MiniMax M2.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiniMax M2.1 is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3.5-0.8B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

MiniMax M2.1

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiniMax M2.1 was released on 2025-12-23, while Qwen3.5-0.8B was released on 2026-03-02.

Qwen3.5-0.8B is 2 months newer than MiniMax M2.1.

MiniMax M2.1

Dec 23, 2025

8 months ago

Qwen3.5-0.8B

Mar 2, 2026

6 months ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen3.5-0.8B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiniMax M2.1
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.5-0.8B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiniMax M2.1 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B.

Which is better, MiniMax M2.1 or Qwen3.5-0.8B?

MiniMax M2.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 31.9 to -6.2. MiniMax M2.1 is made by MiniMax and Qwen3.5-0.8B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does MiniMax M2.1 compare to Qwen3.5-0.8B in benchmarks?

MiniMax M2.1 scores VIBE Web: 91.5%, VIBE Android: 89.7%, VIBE: 88.6%, MMLU-Pro: 88.0%, VIBE iOS: 88.0%. Qwen3.5-0.8B scores MMLU-Redux: 59.5%, Global PIQA: 59.4%, C-Eval: 50.5%, MMMLU: 44.3%, IFEval: 44.0%.

What are the context window sizes for MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen3.5-0.8B?

MiniMax M2.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.5-0.8B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (31.9 vs -6.2), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiniMax M2.1 and Qwen3.5-0.8B?

MiniMax M2.1 is developed by MiniMax and Qwen3.5-0.8B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.