#77 MiniMax M2.5
medium
Reached the allocated time limit (300 seconds) without receiving showcase output.
- Cost
- $0.000
- Time
- 300.0s
- Tokens
- 0 tok
Minimax
Release: 2026-02-12
Tested on: 2026-04-20 17:48
minimax/minimax-m2.5::medium
230B total (10B active)MoEWeights available Summary
MiniMax M2.5 scores 5.7 on AI BENCHY and ranks #77. It has N/A reliability, a 57.4% pass rate, $0.250 total cost, and 39.65s average response time.
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-12
- Parameters
- 230B total (10B active)
- Architecture
- MoE
- Availability
- Weights available
- License
- MiniMax modified MIT
5.7
Consistency
5.6
N/A
$0.250
Total Output Tokens
313,466
Total Input Tokens
0
Input Price
$0.150 / 1M
Output Price
$1.200 / 1M
Cache Read Price
N/A
Cache Write Price
N/A
Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.
Flaky tests
10
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
Run history
| Tested on | Score | Reliability | Tests Correct | Total Cost | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-14 01:38 Re-test | 4.6 | 10.0 | $0.272 ↓ | Compare | |
| 2026-07-16 21:18 New test added | 4.6 | 10.0 | $0.340 ↓ | Compare | |
| 2026-06-04 13:23 New test added | 5.3 | 8.9 | $0.385 ↓ | Compare | |
| 2026-05-21 23:48 Suite changed | 5.4 | 8.3 | $0.305 | Compare | |
| 2026-04-20 17:48 First recorded run | 5.7 | N/A | $0.250 | Current run |
Run comparison
| Run | Benchmark coverage | Score | Consistency | Reliability | Tests Correct | Flaky tests | Total Output Tokens | Total Input Tokens | Total Cost | Response Time (avg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-20 17:48 · First recorded run | 54/54 attempts | 5.7 | 5.6 | N/A | 5/18 | 10 | 313,466 | 0 | $0.250 | 39.65s |
| 2026-08-14 01:38 · Re-test | 66/66 attempts | 4.6 | 6.6 | 10.0 | 5/22 | 9 | 272,229 | 142,621 | $0.272 | 69.08s |
| Difference | — | +1.1 | -1.0 | 0 | +1 | +41237 | -142621 | -$0.023 | -29436ms |
Benchmark coverage differs: 54/54 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test) versus 66/66 attempts (Target: 3 repeats per test). Totals and repeat-sensitive metrics are not directly comparable.
These two runs used different benchmark suites, so the deltas reflect both model changes and suite changes.
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Quick Compare
MiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsMercury 2noneMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsGLM 4.7 FlashmediumMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsCobuddymediumFree AvailableMiniMax M2.5mediumFree Availablevsgpt-oss-120bnoneMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsGranite 4.2 8BnoneMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsMercury 2.5noneMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsTrinity Large PreviewnoneFree AvailableMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsQwen3.5-9BmediumMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsKAT Coder AIR V2.5noneMiniMax M2.5mediumFree AvailablevsLing 3.0 Tinynone
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-AI Tricks | 7.9 | 6.3 | |
| Coding | 3.0 | 10.0 | |
| Combined | 4.5 | 2.1 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 4.6 | 1.7 | |
| Domain specific | 2.9 | 4.4 | |
| General Intelligence | 3.8 | 2.5 | |
| Instructions following | 8.1 | 6.8 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 5.3 | 7.2 | |
| Tool Calling | 10.0 | 10.0 |