Model comparison
Qwen3.5-Plus vs MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning
- Input
- $0.40
- Output
- $2.40
- Context
- 1M
- Released
- 2026-02-16
- Input
- $0.15 / 1M tokens (M2.5); $0.30 / 1M tokens (M2.5-Lightning)
- Output
- $1.20 / 1M tokens (M2.5); $2.40 / 1M tokens (M2.5-Lightning)
- Context
- 205K
- Released
- 2026-02-12
Qwen3.5-Plus scores higher on 2 of the 3 benchmarks both models report (the other leads on 1); MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning is cheaper on input tokens ($0.2 vs $0.4 per 1M, 2.7×); Qwen3.5-Plus has the larger context window (1M vs 205K); MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning ships open weights while Qwen3.5-Plus is API-only.
Specs and pricing side by side
| Spec | Qwen3.5-Plus | MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Alibaba (Qwen) | MiniMax |
| Released | 2026-02-16 | 2026-02-12 |
| Context window | 1M | 205K |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | ~131K tokens |
| Input price | $0.40 | $0.15 / 1M tokens (M2.5); $0.30 / 1M tokens (M2.5-Lightning) |
| Output price | $2.40 | $1.20 / 1M tokens (M2.5); $2.40 / 1M tokens (M2.5-Lightning) |
| Parameters | Undisclosed (serves the Qwen3.5 397B-A17B family — 397B total / 17B active) | 229B total / 10B active (MoE) |
| License | Proprietary | Modified MIT (attribution required for commercial use) |
| Weights | API only | Open weights |
| Modalities | Text, Vision, Video | Text |
| Knowledge cutoff | not published | Not disclosed |
Benchmarks both models report
| Benchmark | Qwen3.5-Plus | MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 88.4% | 85.2% |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.8% | 80.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.4% | 80.2% |
Scores are as published by each maker or its cited source; harness, reasoning effort and date can differ between rows, so treat small gaps as ties. Sources are listed on each model page.
Which one should you pick?
Pick Qwen3.5-Plus if…
- You care about GPQA Diamond, MMLU-Pro (it scores higher on 2 shared benchmarks).
- You need the longer context (1M vs 205K).
- You need Vision / Video input, which MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning lacks.
- Your use case is: high-volume document and PDF understanding across very long contexts.
Pick MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning if…
- You care about SWE-bench Verified (it scores higher on 1 shared benchmark).
- Cost matters: input tokens cost 2.7× less ($0.2 vs $0.4 per 1M).
- You want to self-host or fine-tune (open weights, Modified MIT (attribution required for commercial use)).
- Your use case is: autonomous and semi-autonomous coding agents running across large codebases.
FAQ
Which is better, Qwen3.5-Plus or MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning?
Qwen3.5-Plus scores higher on 2 of the 3 benchmarks both models report (the other leads on 1); MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning is cheaper on input tokens ($0.2 vs $0.4 per 1M, 2.7×); Qwen3.5-Plus has the larger context window (1M vs 205K); MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning ships open weights while Qwen3.5-Plus is API-only. The better pick depends on whether you value benchmark scores, price per token, context length or openness for your workload.
How much cheaper is MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning?
Qwen3.5-Plus: $0.40 input, $2.40 output. MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning: $0.15 / 1M tokens (M2.5); $0.30 / 1M tokens (M2.5-Lightning) input, $1.20 / 1M tokens (M2.5); $2.40 / 1M tokens (M2.5-Lightning) output (list API prices as published by each maker).
What are the context windows of Qwen3.5-Plus and MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning?
Qwen3.5-Plus offers 1M with up to 65,536 tokens output; MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning offers 205K with up to ~131K tokens output.
Is Qwen3.5-Plus newer than MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning?
Qwen3.5-Plus was released 2026-02-16; MiniMax M2.5 / M2.5-Lightning was released 2026-02-12.