Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

See the free Radar Brief
Tencent logo
Model A
Hy3 Preview

Tencent

57.08/100

Estimated · Public rank #94

90% interval 45.668.6

Hy3 Preview vs MAI-Thinking-1

Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Microsoft logo
Model B
MAI-Thinking-1

Microsoft

52.27/100

Estimated · Public rank #123

90% interval 42.462.1

Decision reading

Hy3 Preview has the higher public score estimate, 57.08 versus 52.27, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.

5 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

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.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Hy3 Preview and MAI-Thinking-1 are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Hy3 Preview and MAI-Thinking-1 are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
5
Hy3 Preview only
1
MAI-Thinking-1 only
9
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

4 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Directional only
Hy3 Preview
49.9
Estimated · #66/151
MAI-Thinking-1
51.7
Estimated · #53/151
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 1 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Directional only
Hy3 Preview
45.9
Estimated · #103/183
MAI-Thinking-1
51.8
Estimated · #60/183
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
Hy3 Preview
50.6
Estimated · #86/181
MAI-Thinking-1
53.3
Estimated · #68/181
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Instruction following

Directional only
Hy3 Preview
54.8
#74/120
MAI-Thinking-1
94.7
#1/120
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable
Hy3 Preview
Not ranked
MAI-Thinking-1
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Hy3 Preview
Not ranked
MAI-Thinking-1
73.4
Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Hy3 Preview
Not ranked
MAI-Thinking-1
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Hy3 Preview
Not ranked
MAI-Thinking-1
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

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.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

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

Hy3 Preview
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
MAI-Thinking-1
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Hy3 Preview has no comparable published API token rate. MAI-Thinking-1 has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Hy3 Preview
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
MAI-Thinking-1
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Hy3 Preview has no comparable published API token rate. MAI-Thinking-1 has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Hy3 Preview
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable
MAI-Thinking-1
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Hy3 Preview has no comparable published API token rate. MAI-Thinking-1 has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Hy3 Preview

256K

MAI-Thinking-1

256K

API model ID

Hy3 Preview

Not sourced

MAI-Thinking-1

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Hy3 Preview

No comparable hosted API rate

MAI-Thinking-1

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Hy3 Preview

Not sourced

MAI-Thinking-1

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Hy3 Preview

Not sourced

MAI-Thinking-1

Not sourced

Provider availability

Hy3 Preview

Not sourced

MAI-Thinking-1

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Hy3 Preview

Reasoning

MAI-Thinking-1

Reasoning

Weight access

Hy3 Preview

Open Weight

MAI-Thinking-1

Proprietary

License

Hy3 Preview

Open Weight

MAI-Thinking-1

Proprietary

Release date

Hy3 Preview

2026-04-23

MAI-Thinking-1

2026-06-02

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
Hy3 Preview has the higher public score estimate, 57.08 versus 52.27, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 256K.

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 evidence15 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Hy3 Preview54.4%
    Source
    MAI-Thinking-146%
    Source

    Hy3 Preview leads this result

  • Gert Labs

    Hy3 Preview36.91%
    Source
    MAI-Thinking-1

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Hy3 Preview74.4%
    Source
    MAI-Thinking-173.5%
    Source

    Hy3 Preview leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Hy3 Preview54.4%
    Source
    MAI-Thinking-146.0%
    Source

    Hy3 Preview leads this result

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-187.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-152.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • Graphwalks BFS 128K

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-190%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Hy3 Preview87.2%
    Source
    MAI-Thinking-184.2%
    Source

    Hy3 Preview leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Hy3 Preview87.2%
    Source
    MAI-Thinking-184.2%
    Source

    Hy3 Preview leads this result

  • MMLU-Pro

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-185%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SimpleQA

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-131%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME 2025

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-197%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-194.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-184.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Hy3 Preview
    MAI-Thinking-185%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Hy3 Preview or MAI-Thinking-1?

Hy3 Preview has the higher public score estimate, 57.08 versus 52.27, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.

Which is better for coding, Hy3 Preview or MAI-Thinking-1?

MAI-Thinking-1 scores higher for coding on the public lane, 51.8 to 45.9. Hy3 Preview and MAI-Thinking-1 are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Hy3 Preview or MAI-Thinking-1?

MAI-Thinking-1 scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 51.7 to 49.9. Hy3 Preview and MAI-Thinking-1 are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Hy3 Preview or MAI-Thinking-1?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Hy3 Preview or MAI-Thinking-1?

Both models list the same context window, 256K.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 4, 2026

Watch Hy3 Preview vs MAI-Thinking-1

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.