Navigate
AI BENCHY
AD
Track all your projects in one dashboard. Get 📊stats, 🔥heatmaps and 👀recordings in one self-hosted dashboard.
uxwizz.com

AI BENCHY Compare

MiniMax: MiniMax M2.5 vs Qwen: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Summary

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads on average score with 5.3 vs 4.7. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the lower benchmark cost at $0.020 vs $0.303. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is faster at 3.41s vs 65.37s, with pass rates of 46.0% vs 31.8%.

Recommended modelQwen3.5-122B-A10BIt has the best score here (5.3), while costing about 15.6x less than MiniMax M2.5 (medium).

Last updated at: 2026-07-16

Metric MiniMax M2.5 MiniMax M2.5 medium Release: 2026-02-12 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B Qwen3.5-122B-A10B none Release: 2026-02-24
Score 4.7 5.3
Rank #175 #153
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 6.5 9.6
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 46.0% 31.8%
Flaky tests 9 1
Total Runs 63 63
Cost per result 7.900 0.393
Total Cost $0.303 $0.020
Input Price $0.150 / 1M $0.260 / 1M
Output Price $0.900 / 1M $2.080 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 43,706 47,735
Output Tokens 109,495 3,383
Reasoning Tokens 330,814 0
Response Time (avg) 65.37s 3.41s
Response Time (max) 251.36s 46.00s
Response Time (total) 849.76s 71.59s

Generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#175 MiniMax M2.5

medium
Invalid SVG
Cost
$0.000
Time
300.0s
Tokens
0 tok

#153 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

none
Cost
$0.016
Time
44.5s
Tokens
6,431 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
MiniMax M2.5 3.4 9.1 0.0% 0 188.58s 6,076 357 106,177
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B 3.7 7.0 22.2% 1 2.77s 7,913 693 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair