Model Comparison

Llama 4 vs MiniMax M2.7 - scale vs radical efficiency

Meta's Llama 4 family offers the longest context window in open models (10M tokens) and 400B-scale MoE architecture. MiniMax M2.7 (230B total, 10B active, 256 experts) achieves frontier-class performance at 1/50th the cost of mainstream flagship models. Two very different approaches to the same goal.

Performance

Head-to-head benchmark comparison

MiniMax M2.7 achieves remarkable benchmark scores with only 10B active parameters, while Llama 4 offers unmatched context length and proven open-weight ecosystem support.

MiniMax M2.7 launched March 2026 as a self-evolving model with 230B total parameters and only 10B active per token (8 of 256 experts). It scores 50 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index and achieves 56.22% on SWE-Pro. Llama 4 Maverick (400B, 17B active) competes on general benchmarks, while Scout's 10M context window remains unmatched.

Llama 4 vs MiniMax M2.7 benchmark comparison chart

MiniMax M2.7: 10B active parameters achieving Tier-1 performance

MiniMax M2.7: SWE-Pro 56.22%, 100 tokens/second throughput

MiniMax M2.7: $0.30/M input tokens - 1/50th of flagship model pricing

Maverick: MMLU Pro 80.5%, MMMU 73.4% - strong all-around quality

Scout: 10M token context - 50x longer than M2.7's 200K

Full comparison

Llama 4 family vs MiniMax M2.7

Complete benchmark results across reasoning, coding, and efficiency metrics.

Benchmark
Llama 4 Maverick
400B / 17B active
Open Weight
Llama 4 Scout
109B / 17B active
Long Context
MiniMax M2.7
230B / 10B active
Efficient
MMLU Pro
Knowledge & reasoning
80.5%74.3%-
MMMU
Multimodal
73.4%69.4%-
SWE-Pro
Agentic coding
--56.22%
Intelligence Index
Artificial Analysis
--50
Context Window
Max tokens
1M10M200K
Total Parameters
Model size
400B109B230B
Active Parameters
Per token
17B17B10B
Number of Experts
MoE routing
12816256 (8 selected)
Throughput
Tokens per second
--100 TPS
API Input Cost
Per million tokens
VariesVaries$0.30

Data from Meta's official model card, MiniMax's technical report, and independent evaluations.

Choose Llama 4

When to choose Llama 4 over MiniMax M2.7

Llama 4 is the better choice when you need massive context windows, proven multimodal capabilities, or fully open-weight models for self-hosted deployment. Scout's 10M context is 50x longer than M2.7's 200K.

  • 10M token context (Scout) - 50x longer than M2.7's 200K
  • Fully open-weight for self-hosted deployment
  • MMLU Pro 80.5% - strong general knowledge and reasoning
  • MMMU 73.4% - proven multimodal understanding
  • Broad ecosystem support across all major cloud providers

Choose MiniMax M2.7

When MiniMax M2.7 has the edge

MiniMax M2.7 achieves frontier-class performance with only 10B active parameters - the most efficient ratio in the industry. Its self-evolving architecture and ultra-low pricing make it compelling for cost-sensitive production workloads.

  • 10B active parameters - lowest active count among frontier models
  • $0.30/M input tokens - 1/50th of mainstream flagship pricing
  • SWE-Pro 56.22% - strong agentic coding performance
  • 100 tokens/second throughput for fast inference
  • Self-evolving architecture that improves over time

Llama 4 Family

Explore more Llama 4 comparisons and models

Dive deeper into individual Llama 4 models or see how they compare against other frontier open models.

Llama 4 Scout

10M context window specialist

Explore

Llama 4 Maverick

400B flagship with 128 experts

Explore

All Llama 4 Models

Complete family overview

View all

Llama 4 vs Kimi K2.6

Meta vs Moonshot comparison

Compare

Llama 4 vs Qwen 3.6

Meta vs Alibaba comparison

Compare

Llama 4 vs DeepSeek V4

MoE architecture showdown

Compare

Get started

Try Llama 4 models for free

Start chatting with Llama 4 Maverick or Scout instantly. No setup required - compare the models yourself.