Capability
58.6/100
field median 59.1
#88 of 230 ranked models
Superseded.MiniMax has newer models in this line:MiniMax M2.7
MiniMax M2.5
SupersededReleased Oct 1, 2025ProprietaryNon-Reasoning128K context
Released Oct 1, 2025 — see all recent releases
Decision reading
MiniMax M2.5 scores 58.6 out of 100 and ranks #88 of 230. This profile shows 4 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Coding at #70. API pricing is $0.3 input and $1.2 output per million tokens.
Data as of September 2, 2026 · How the score is built
Strongest published evidence
Coding ranks #70. Particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Validate before choosing
4 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Agentic is its lowest eligible category at #97.
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Price
$0.30input / $1.20 output
input median $1
blended $0.75
Speed
93tok/s
field median 90 tok/s
First token 23.3 s
Context
128Ktokens
field median 256,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
MiniMax M2.5 category percentile values
- Agentic32nd percentile
- Coding53rd percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- KnowledgeNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#97/143
- Coding#70/148
- ReasoningNot ranked
- KnowledgeNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
What it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Current modelMiniMax M2.5 · 58.6 score · $0.75 blended per million tokens
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
How much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic2/3 verified
- Coding1/1 verified
- ReasoningNot measured
- KnowledgeNot measured
- MathNot measured
- MultilingualNot measured
- MultimodalNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not published
- Context window
- 128K
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Superseded
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #97 of 143Percentile 32ndWeight 22%3 benchmarksMixed sources | 43.4 | #97 of 143 | 32nd | 22% | 3 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| CodingRank #70 of 148Percentile 53rdWeight 20%1 benchmarkVerified | 52.7 | #70 of 148 | 53rd | 20% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| KnowledgeWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchVibe Code Bench v1.1 | Score14.85% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.7 · 71.00% | Gap56.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Agentic3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MEWCMulti-Environment Web Challenge | Score74.4% | Versus best verified row | GapNo verified comparator | WeightDisplay only | Reported |
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | Score39.11% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap33.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| JobBench | Score14.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.3 · 64.9% | Gap50.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. A successor's displayed score stays at least 0.1 points above its predecessor; raw benchmark rows do not move. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Oct 1, 2025 · you are here
MiniMax M2.5Score 58.6 · $0.3 / $1.2
Mar 18, 2026
MiniMax M2.7Score 62.9 · $0.3 / $1.2
Base entry
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
MiniMax M2.5 ranks #88 of 230 on the public leaderboard with a score of 58.63/100. Its source-verified position is #47 of 105.
MiniMax M2.5 is a proprietary model with a 128K context window. No explicit reasoning mode is documented in this profile.
4 of 416 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Coding at #70, while its lowest eligible position is Agentic at #97. particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Frequently asked questions
How does MiniMax M2.5 perform overall in AI benchmarks?
MiniMax M2.5 ranks #88 out of 230 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 58.63/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 4 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is MiniMax M2.5 good for coding and programming?
MiniMax M2.5 ranks #70 out of 148 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 52.7/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is MiniMax M2.5 good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
MiniMax M2.5 ranks #97 out of 143 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 43.4/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Does MiniMax M2.5 have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. MiniMax M2.5 currently has 1 source-displayable rows across 416 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of MiniMax M2.5?
MiniMax M2.5 has a reported context window of 128K in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.
Compare MiniMax M2.5 with every tracked model409 comparisons
Last updated September 2, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Watch MiniMax M2.5 in the weekly brief
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.