Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs MiniMax M2.7

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
64.11/100
2 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored); MiniMax M2.7 #36 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and MiniMax M2.7 share 15 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite; 20 to MiniMax M2.7.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
15
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
6
MiniMax M2.7 only
20
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; MiniMax M2.7 is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and MiniMax M2.7 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens for MiniMax M2.7. That is roughly 2.1x on output cost alone. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M2.7 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for MiniMax M2.7.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and MiniMax M2.7
CategoryGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔMiniMax M2.7
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4Margin← 6.4MiniMax M2.757.0
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2Margin← 0.9MiniMax M2.753.3
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2MarginNo overlapMiniMax M2.7Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteB · MiniMax M2.7

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 54%B 57%
    Winner: MiniMax M2.7Δ 3
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%; MiniMax M2.7 scored 57%. MiniMax M2.7 wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 54.2%B 56.2%
    Winner: MiniMax M2.7Δ 2
    SWE-bench Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54.2%; MiniMax M2.7 scored 56.2%. MiniMax M2.7 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 outputMiniMax M2.7$0.3 input / $1.2 outputMiniMax M2.7 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableMiniMax M2.745 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableMiniMax M2.72.53 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1MMiniMax M2.7200KGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 54%57%MiniMax M2.7 leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 74%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 11401158MiniMax M2.7 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 26.8%25.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
GDPval-AASource 32.0%32.9%MiniMax M2.7 leads
AA BriefcaseSource 634—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 16.5%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource —84.8%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource —46.3%Not comparable
MLE-Bench LiteSource —66.6%Not comparable
MM-ClawBenchSource —62.7%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —48.7%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource —10.6%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource —40.40%Not comparable
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 54.0%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 54.2%56.2%MiniMax M2.7 leads
AA Coding IndexSource 49.3%52.6%MiniMax M2.7 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 40.9%47.0%MiniMax M2.7 leads
SWE-bench Verified*Source —75.4%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource —51.9%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource —76.5%Not comparable
Multi-SWE BenchSource —52.7%Not comparable
VIBE-ProSource —55.6%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource —39.8%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource —27.04%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource —71.4%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Result
MRCRv2Source 72.2%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 62.0%68.7%MiniMax M2.7 leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.6%MiniMax M2.7 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 36.5%38.1%MiniMax M2.7 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 83.8%87.4%MiniMax M2.7 leads
AA-HLESource 17.5%28.1%MiniMax M2.7 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 6.9%0.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 30.3%26.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 33.5%34.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
GPQA-DSource —87.0%Not comparable
MMLU-Pro (Arcee)Source —80.8%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Result
AIME25 (Arcee)Source —80.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 79.0%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1275Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteMiniMax M2.7Result
AA-IFBenchSource —75.7%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M2.7?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and MiniMax M2.7 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M2.7?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 54.2 versus 53.3. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M2.7?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 57. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Google Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 21, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.