Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
DeepSeek V4 Flash
57
MiniMax M3
76
Verified leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash #27 · MiniMax M3 #12
Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Flash only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+22.8 difference
Coding
+9.9 difference
DeepSeek V4 Flash
MiniMax M3
$0.14 / $0.28
$0.3 / $1.2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
1M
Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Flash only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
MiniMax M3 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 76 to 57. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiniMax M3's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 71.9 against 49.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 49.1% to 66%.
MiniMax M3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash. That is roughly 4.3x on output cost alone.
MiniMax M3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 76 to 57. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 49.1% and 66%.
MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 67 versus 57.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiniMax M3 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.9 versus 49.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.