Model Comparison

MiniMax M2.5 vs QvQ-72B-Preview

Comparing MiniMax M2.5 and QvQ-72B-Preview across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

MiniMax M2.5 and QvQ-72B-Preview don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com
MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerMiniMax
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QvQ-72B-Preview
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

156.6B diff

MiniMax M2.5 has 156.6B more parameters than QvQ-72B-Preview, making it 213.4% larger.

MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
230.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QvQ-72B-Preview
73.4Bparameters
230.0B
MiniMax M2.5
73.4B
QvQ-72B-Preview

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only MiniMax M2.5 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only MiniMax M2.5 specifies output context (1,000,000 tokens).

MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output1,000,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QvQ-72B-Preview
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Apr 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

QvQ-72B-Preview supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniMax M2.5 does not.

QvQ-72B-Preview can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

MiniMax M2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

QvQ-72B-Preview

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiniMax M2.5 is licensed under MIT, while QvQ-72B-Preview uses Qwen.

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

MiniMax M2.5

MIT

Open weights

QvQ-72B-Preview

Qwen

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiniMax M2.5 was released on 2026-02-12, while QvQ-72B-Preview was released on 2024-12-25.

MiniMax M2.5 is 14 months newer than QvQ-72B-Preview.

MiniMax M2.5

Feb 12, 2026

2 months ago

1.1yr newer
QvQ-72B-Preview

Dec 25, 2024

1.3 years ago

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→

Key Takeaways

MiniMax
Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

QvQ-72B-Preview

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Supports multimodal inputs

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QvQ-72B-Preview

FAQ

Common questions about MiniMax M2.5 vs QvQ-72B-Preview

MiniMax M2.5 (MiniMax) and QvQ-72B-Preview (Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.
MiniMax M2.5 scores SWE-Bench Verified: 80.2%, BFCL_v3_MultiTurn: 76.8%, BrowseComp: 76.3%, MEWC: 74.4%, GDPval-MM: 59.0%. QvQ-72B-Preview scores MathVista: 71.4%, MMMU: 70.3%, MathVision: 35.9%, OlympiadBench: 20.4%.
MiniMax M2.5 supports 1.0M tokens and QvQ-72B-Preview supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Qwen). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
MiniMax M2.5 is developed by MiniMax and QvQ-72B-Preview is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.