Side-by-side benchmark comparison across knowledge, coding, math, and reasoning.
MiniMax M2.5 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 66 to 39. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiniMax M2.5's sharpest advantage is in multilingual, where it averages 84 against 80.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HumanEval, 65 to 82.6. Phi-4 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
MiniMax M2.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Phi-4. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. MiniMax M2.5 gives you the larger context window at 128K, compared with 16K for Phi-4.
Pick MiniMax M2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Phi-4 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
MiniMax M2.5
61
Phi-4
70.5
MiniMax M2.5
48.3
Phi-4
82.6
MiniMax M2.5
84
Phi-4
80.6
MiniMax M2.5 is ahead overall, 66 to 39. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HumanEval, where the scores are 65 and 82.6.
Phi-4 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.5 versus 61. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Phi-4 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 82.6 versus 48.3. Inside this category, HumanEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiniMax M2.5 has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 84 versus 80.6. Inside this category, MGSM is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.