Model Comparison
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs MiniMax M2.5Which is better in 2026?
MiniMax M2.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. MiniMax M2.5 is 2.6x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs MiniMax M2.5 — which is better?
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) and MiniMax M2.5 (by MiniMax) 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.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while MiniMax M2.5 is better at 2 benchmarks (BrowseComp, SWE-Bench Verified). MiniMax M2.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, MiniMax M2.5 is roughly 2.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
MiniMax M2.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Qwen3.5-397B-A17B if…
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026
Choose MiniMax M2.5 if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 2 of 2 shared benchmarks
- cost matters — it's about 2.6x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while MiniMax M2.5 is better at 2 benchmarks (BrowseComp, SWE-Bench Verified).
MiniMax M2.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($0.60/1M tokens) is 2.0x more expensive than MiniMax M2.5 ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B ($3.60/1M tokens) is 3.0x more expensive than MiniMax M2.5 ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is more expensive than MiniMax M2.5.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B has 167.0B more parameters than MiniMax M2.5, making it 72.6% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
MiniMax M2.5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3.5-397B-A17B's 262,144 tokens. MiniMax M2.5 can generate longer responses up to 1,000,000 tokens, while Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is limited to 64,000 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniMax M2.5 does not.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
MiniMax M2.5
License
Usage and distribution terms
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while MiniMax M2.5 uses MIT.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Apache 2.0
Open weights
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B was released on 2026-02-16, while MiniMax M2.5 was released on 2026-02-12.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is 0 month newer than MiniMax M2.5.
Feb 16, 2026
3 months ago
4d newerFeb 12, 2026
3 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B is available from Novita. MiniMax M2.5 is available from MiniMax.
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
MiniMax M2.5
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
MiniMax M2.5
View detailsMiniMax
Detailed Comparison
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs MiniMax M2.5.