MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning): The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, MiniMax-M2.1 emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) comparison will break down every critical metric to help you make the best decision.

Explore best-for scenarios•Let the AI Selector recommend next steps

Model Snapshot

Key decision metrics at a glance.

MiniMax-M2.1

Other

Reasoning: 8
Coding: 3
Multimodal: 3
Long Context: 5
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.001
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 67.338tokens/sec

GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)

Other

Reasoning: 5
Coding: 3
Multimodal: 3
Long Context: 4
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.001
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 124.204tokens/sec

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `MiniMax-M2.1` vs `GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) debate, MiniMax-M2.1 scores 80 against GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)'s 50. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

MiniMax-M2.1300ms

GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)300ms

Tokens per Second

MiniMax-M2.167.338

GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)124.204

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning)

Power is only one part of the equation. This MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, MiniMax-M2.1 would cost $0.001, whereas GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) would cost $0.001. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) Battle for You?

Choose MiniMax-M2.1 if...

Your top priority is raw performance and capability.

You are working in a technical or scientific field requiring the highest accuracy.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Choose GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) if...

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

You prioritize cost-effectiveness over maximum performance.

Your workload requires consistent, reliable performance.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the MiniMax-M2.1 vs GLM-4.7 (Non-reasoning) Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/