Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro Base vs MiniMax M3

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No sourced benchmark result is currently shared by both models. This page therefore compares only the available metadata, pricing, and runtime rows; it does not name a quality winner.
No comparison
MiniMax
69.75/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base unranked (Not scored); MiniMax M3 #15 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and MiniMax M3 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 24 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro Base; 45 to MiniMax M3.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
0
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base only
24
MiniMax M3 only
45
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and MiniMax M3 is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableMiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableMiniMax M3Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableMiniMax M3Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro Base1MMiniMax M31MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 83.5%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 70.1%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 74.2%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 74.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 35.4%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 88.9%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 44.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1395Not comparable
GDPval rubricsSource 74.7%Not comparable
BankerToolBenchSource 76.1%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 19.8%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 4.6%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1110Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 32.1%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 88.4%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 42.4%Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source 65.2%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
BigCodeBenchSource 59.2%Not comparable
HumanEvalSource 76.8%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 59%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66.0%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 42.1%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 58.6%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 45.4%Not comparable
VIBE V2Source 50.1%Not comparable
SVG-BenchSource 63.7%Not comparable
KernelBench HardSource 28.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
BBHSource 87.5%Not comparable
DROPSource 88.7%Not comparable
HellaSwagSource 88.0%Not comparable
WinoGrandeSource 81.5%Not comparable
CLUEWSCSource 85.2%Not comparable
LongBench v2Source 51.5%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 74.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 3.7%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
AGIEvalSource 83.1%Not comparable
MMLUSource 90.1%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 90.8%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 73.5%Not comparable
MMMLUSource 90.3%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 93.1%Not comparable
CMMLUSource 90.8%Not comparable
MultiLoKoSource 51.1%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 55.2%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 53.9%Not comparable
FACTS ParametricSource 62.6%Not comparable
TriviaQASource 85.6%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 44.4%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.9%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 37.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 1.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 15.0%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 16.1%Not comparable
AA Openness IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
GSM8KSource 92.6%Not comparable
MATHSource 64.5%Not comparable
CMathSource 90.9%Not comparable
USAMO 2026Source 85.7%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
MGSMSource 84.4%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
OfficeQA ProSource 45.1%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source 91.6%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 78.1%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 84.6%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source 85.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1289Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.6%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseMiniMax M3Result
AA-IFBenchSource 82.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and MiniMax M3 on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and MiniMax M3 today?

DeepSeek V4 Pro Base: Pricing unavailable MiniMax M3: $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 21, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.