Agentic
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- Not measured
- MiniMax M3
- 72.3
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 3 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs MiniMax M3
Updated August 30, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.
0 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
MiniMax M3
MiniMax M3 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documented
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
3 Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite only
22 MiniMax M3 only
- Shared results
- 0
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite only
- 3
- MiniMax M3 only
- 22
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.
Coding
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- Not measured
- MiniMax M3
- 72.2
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- Not measured
- MiniMax M3
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- Not measured
- MiniMax M3
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- Not measured
- MiniMax M3
- 85.7
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- Not measured
- MiniMax M3
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- 73.2
- MiniMax M3
- 64.9
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- Not measured
- MiniMax M3
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite | MiniMax M3 | Weighted basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Not measured | 72.3 | Not comparable0 vs 3 rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | Not measured | 72.2 | Not comparable0 vs 2 rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not measured | 85.7 | Not comparable0 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | 73.2 | 64.9 | Not comparable1 vs 2 rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
A shared-evidence shape is not available.
BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- $0.001
- Fits in one request
- MiniMax M3
- $0.0009
- Fits in one request
MiniMax M3 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- $0.017
- Fits in one request
- MiniMax M3
- $0.0186
- Fits in one request
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- $0.025
- Fits in one request
- MiniMax M3
- $0.03
- Fits in one request
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGemini 3.1 Flash-LiteMiniMax M3
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
MiniMax M3
1M
API model ID
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
gemini-3.1-flash-lite
Google Gemini API pricingMiniMax M3
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
$0.025 per 1M cached input tokens
Google Gemini API pricingMiniMax M3
$0.06 per 1M cached input tokens
Documented inputs
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Not sourced
MiniMax M3
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Not sourced
MiniMax M3
Not sourced
Provider availability
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Not sourced
MiniMax M3
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Non-Reasoning
MiniMax M3
Non-Reasoning
Weight access
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Proprietary
MiniMax M3
Open Weight
License
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
Proprietary
MiniMax M3
Open Weight
Release date
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
2026-03-03
MiniMax M3
2026-06-01
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.017 vs $0.0186. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.025 vs $0.03.
- Context tradeoff
- Both models list 1M.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence25 rows
Agentic
Gert Labs
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite38.46%SourceMiniMax M3—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M366%SourceNot directly comparable
BrowseComp
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M383.5%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M370.1%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M374.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M374.5%SourceNot directly comparable
BankerToolBench
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M376.1%SourceNot directly comparable
ResearchClawBench
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M319.8%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M34.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Vibe Code Bench
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite0.00%SourceMiniMax M3—Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M380.5%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M359%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M366.0%SourceNot directly comparable
NL2Repo
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M342.1%SourceNot directly comparable
VIBE V2
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M350.1%SourceNot directly comparable
SVG-Bench
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M363.7%SourceNot directly comparable
KernelBench Hard
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M328.8%SourceNot directly comparable
OpenHarmony Bench
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M348.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Math
USAMO 2026
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M385.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Multimodal
CharXiv
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite73.2%SourceMiniMax M3—Not directly comparable
OfficeQA Pro
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M345.1%SourceNot directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M391.6%SourceNot directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M378.1%SourceNot directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M384.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite—MiniMax M385.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M3?
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M3?
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M3?
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.
Which costs less, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M3?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.001 on Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite and $0.0009 on MiniMax M3; repository review costs $0.017 and $0.0186; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.025 and $0.03. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Which has the larger context window, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite or MiniMax M3?
Both models list the same context window, 1M.
Related comparisons
Last updated August 30, 2026
Watch Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite vs MiniMax M3
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.