Model Comparison

MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Comparing MiniMax M2.5 and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

MiniMax M2.5 and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct 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

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs less

For input processing, MiniMax M2.5 ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.3x more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

For output processing, MiniMax M2.5 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 13.3x more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

In conclusion, MiniMax M2.5 is more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Apr 21 2026 • llm-stats.com
MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerMiniMax
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
Input tokens$0.09
Output tokens$0.09
Best providerLambda
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

198.0B diff

MiniMax M2.5 has 198.0B more parameters than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct, making it 618.8% larger.

MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
230.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
32.0Bparameters
230.0B
MiniMax M2.5
32.0B
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiniMax M2.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. MiniMax M2.5 can generate longer responses up to 1,000,000 tokens, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is limited to 128,000 tokens.

MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output1,000,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Apr 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiniMax M2.5 is licensed under MIT, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

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

MiniMax M2.5

MIT

Open weights

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiniMax M2.5 was released on 2026-02-12, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct was released on 2024-09-19.

MiniMax M2.5 is 17 months newer than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.

MiniMax M2.5

Feb 12, 2026

2 months ago

1.4yr newer
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

1.6 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

Provider Availability

MiniMax M2.5 is available from MiniMax. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is available from Lambda, DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks.

MiniMax M2.5

minimax logo
MiniMax
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

lambda logo
Lambda
Input Price:Input: $0.09/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.09/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Key Takeaways

Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
MiniMax
MiniMax M2.5
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

MiniMax M2.5 (MiniMax) and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct (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%. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct scores HumanEval: 92.7%, GSM8k: 91.1%, MBPP: 90.2%, HellaSwag: 83.0%, Winogrande: 80.8%.
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 3.3x cheaper for input tokens. MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via minimax. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.09/M input and $0.09/M output via lambda.
MiniMax M2.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($0.30 vs $0.09/M), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
MiniMax M2.5 is developed by MiniMax and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.