Hy3 Preview vs MiniMax M2.7

Pick Hy3 Preview if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiniMax M2.7 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Hy3 Preview is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 59 to 53. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Hy3 Preview's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 60 against 53.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 54.4% to 57%. MiniMax M2.7 does hit back in agentic, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

MiniMax M2.7 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Hy3 Preview. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Hy3 Preview is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M2.7 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. Hy3 Preview gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for MiniMax M2.7.