OPEN LINK ↗
// 79d agoBENCHMARK RESULT
MiniMax M2.5 still tops Qwen3-Coder-Next on 96GB rigs
In a LocalLLaMA field report, a user running 4 x 3090 Ti cards says MiniMax M2.5 still beats Qwen3-Coder-Next on greenfield coding work, even though QCN runs much faster. The complaint is not speed but planning depth: QCN handled a long PRD prompt quickly, yet still felt weaker than M2.5 when asked to turn that spec into useful project work through OpenCode.
// ANALYSIS
This is the local-coding-model tradeoff in one post: throughput gets attention, but greenfield software work still rewards models that can decompose specs and make better architectural calls.
- –The poster reports QCN chewing through a roughly 48k-token prompt at solid speed, but still delivering output that felt shallow compared with MiniMax M2.5
- –That lines up with MiniMax's official M2.5 positioning around spec writing, agentic planning, OpenCode compatibility, and strong SWE-Bench-style coding performance
- –For self-hosters with 96GB of VRAM, the practical takeaway is that slower models can still be the better daily driver if they need less babysitting on full-project tasks
- –It is still one anecdotal benchmark, not a controlled eval, but these rig-level reports often surface failure modes long before polished leaderboards do
// TAGS
minimax-m2-5llmai-codingreasoningbenchmarkself-hosted
DISCOVERED
79d ago
2026-03-09
PUBLISHED
79d ago
2026-03-09
RELEVANCE
8/ 10
AUTHOR
Ok-Measurement-1575
