Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiniMax M3

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 29 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

75.02/100
Margin
5.2pts
← winning
MiniMax M3
MiniMax
69.8/100
2 category wins2 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #7; MiniMax M3 #18

BenchAlign evidence: Gemini 3.5 Flash supported; MiniMax M3 supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash and MiniMax M3 share 29 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 22 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash; 16 to MiniMax M3.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
29
Gemini 3.5 Flash only
22
MiniMax M3 only
16
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiniMax M3 only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 29 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Gemini 3.5 Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 80 to 70. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Gemini 3.5 Flash's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 83.8 against 64.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 76.2% to 66%. MiniMax M3 does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Gemini 3.5 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.50 input / $9.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens for MiniMax M3. That is roughly 7.5x on output cost alone. Gemini 3.5 Flash is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M3 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Gemini 3.5 Flash and MiniMax M3
CategoryGemini 3.5 FlashΔMiniMax M3
MathGemini 3.5 Flash32.9Margin→ 52.8MiniMax M385.7
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash83.8Margin← 18.9MiniMax M364.9
CodingGemini 3.5 Flash53.9Margin→ 18.3MiniMax M372.2
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash77.2Margin← 4.9MiniMax M372.3
ReasoningGemini 3.5 Flash74.7MarginNo overlapMiniMax M3Not measured
KnowledgeGemini 3.5 Flash47.2MarginNo overlapMiniMax M3Not measured
Inst. FollowingGemini 3.5 Flash76.3MarginNo overlapMiniMax M3Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Gemini 3.5 FlashB · MiniMax M3

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 76.2%B 66%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 10.2
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 76.2%; MiniMax M3 scored 66%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

  2. OSWorld-Verified

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 78.4%B 70.1%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 8.3
    OSWorld-Verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 78.4%; MiniMax M3 scored 70.1%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

  3. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 83.6%B 78.1%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 5.5
    MMMU-Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 83.6%; MiniMax M3 scored 78.1%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark.

  4. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 55.1%B 59%
    Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 3.9
    SWE-bench Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 55.1%; MiniMax M3 scored 59%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGemini 3.5 Flash$1.5 input / $9 outputMiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 outputMiniMax M3 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGemini 3.5 Flash284.2 tok/sMiniMax M3Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGemini 3.5 Flash18.55 sMiniMax M3Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGemini 3.5 Flash1MMiniMax M31MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 76.2%66%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
MCP AtlasSource 83.6%74.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
ToolathlonSource 56.5%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 78.4%70.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Finance Agent v2Source 57.9%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 13491395MiniMax M3 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.3%88.9%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
GDPval-AASource 42.4%44.7%MiniMax M3 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 37.5%35.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 47.1%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 62.80%—Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 18.0%19.8%MiniMax M3 leads
AA BriefcaseSource 8661110MiniMax M3 leads
AA AutomationBenchSource 42.6%—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 50.1%32.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA Harvey LABSource 1.7%6.7%MiniMax M3 leads
AA ITBenchSource 40.3%—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 25.4%—Not comparable
BrowseCompSource —83.5%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —74.5%Not comparable
GDPval rubricsSource —74.7%Not comparable
BankerToolBenchSource —76.1%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source —4.6%Not comparable
CodingMiniMax M3 wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 76.2%66.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Terminal-Bench HardSource 40.9%42.4%MiniMax M3 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 55.1%59%MiniMax M3 leads
SciCodeSource 53.1%—Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 48.68%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 49.8%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 48.8%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 70.1%58.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.1%45.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source 78.7%65.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource —80.5%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource —42.1%Not comparable
VIBE V2Source —50.1%Not comparable
SVG-BenchSource —63.7%Not comparable
KernelBench HardSource —28.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Result
MRCRv2Source 77.3%—Not comparable
MRCR 1MSource 26.6%—Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 72.1%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.3%74.0%MiniMax M3 leads
CritPtSource 13.1%3.7%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 50.2%44.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
GPQASource 92.2%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 92.7%—Not comparable
HLESource 40.2%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 51.9%15.0%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 60.7%16.1%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.2%92.9%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-HLESource 41.0%37.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 22.7%1.4%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
AA Openness IndexSource —33.3%Not comparable
MathMiniMax M3 wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 38.966%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 14.583%—Not comparable
USAMO 2026Source —85.7%Not comparable
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash wins
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Result
CharXivSource 84.2%—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 83.6%78.1%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Blueprint-Bench 2Source 33.6%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 84.3%78.6%Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12881294MiniMax M3 leads
OfficeQA ProSource —45.1%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source —91.6%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —84.6%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source —85.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGemini 3.5 FlashMiniMax M3Result
IFBenchSource 76.3%—Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 76.3%82.9%MiniMax M3 leads
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?

Gemini 3.5 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 80 to 70. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 76.2% and 66%.

Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?

MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 53.9. Inside this category, AA Terminal-Bench 2.1 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?

MiniMax M3 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 85.7 versus 32.9. Gemini 3.5 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 72.3. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?

Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 64.9. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Google Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 16, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.