DataLearner logo

GLM 5.1vsMiniMax-M2.7

Across 4 shared benchmarks, GLM 5.1 leads overall: GLM 5.1 wins 3, MiniMax-M2.7 wins 1, with 0 ties and an average score difference of +8.10.

智谱AI
GLM 5.1

智谱AI · 2026-03-27 · Reasoning model

MiniMaxAI
MiniMax-M2.7

MiniMaxAI · 2026-03-18 · Reasoning model

GLM 5.13 wins(75%)(25%)1 winMiniMax-M2.7

Benchmark scores

Grouped by capability, sorted by largest gap within each. 4 shared benchmarks.

General Knowledge

GLM 5.1 2/3
BenchmarkGLM 5.1MiniMax-M2.7Diff
HLE52.3019 / 172Thinking (With Tools)2896 / 172Thinking (No Tools)+24.30
LiveBench70.1837 / 115Normal (No Tools)63.4956 / 115Deep Thinking (No Tools)+6.69
GPQA Diamond86.2047 / 187Thinking (No Tools)8742 / 187Thinking (No Tools)-0.80

Coding and Software Engineer

GLM 5.1 1/1
BenchmarkGLM 5.1MiniMax-M2.7Diff
SWE-Bench Pro - Public58.4015 / 54Thinking (With Tools)56.2024 / 54Thinking (With Tools)+2.20

Specs

FieldGLM 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
Publisher智谱AIMiniMaxAI
Release date2026-03-272026-03-18
Model typeReasoning modelReasoning model
ArchitectureMoEMoE
Parameters75.4B229B
Context length200K200K
Max output125K200K

API pricing

Prices use DataLearner records when available; missing fields are not inferred.

ItemGLM 5.1MiniMax-M2.7
Text input$1.4 / 1M tokens$0.3 / 1M tokens
Text output$4.4 / 1M tokens$1.2 / 1M tokens
Cache read$4.4 / 1M tokens$0.06 / 1M tokens
Cache write$0.26 / 1M tokens$0.375 / 1M tokens

Summary

  • GLM 5.1leads in:General Knowledge (2/3), Coding and Software Engineer (1/1)

On average across the 4 shared benchmarks, GLM 5.1 scores 8.10 higher.

Largest single-benchmark gap: HLE — GLM 5.1 52.30 vs MiniMax-M2.7 28 (+24.30).

Page generated from structured model, pricing and benchmark records. No real-time LLM is used to write the prose.