Model comparison
Laguna XS.2 vs MiniMax M3
Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Laguna XS.2 unranked; MiniMax M3 #18
BenchAlign evidence: Laguna XS.2 not scored; MiniMax M3 supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Laguna XS.2 and MiniMax M3 share 4 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Laguna XS.2; 41 to MiniMax M3.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 4
- Laguna XS.2 only
- 1
- MiniMax M3 only
- 41
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Laguna XS.2 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiniMax M3 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 70 to 46. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiniMax M3's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 72.3 against 35.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 35.7% to 66%.
MiniMax M3 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 Laguna XS.2. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Laguna XS.2 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. MiniMax M3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Laguna XS.2.
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 | Laguna XS.2 | Δ | MiniMax M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Laguna XS.235.7 | Margin→ 36.6 | MiniMax M372.3 |
| Coding | Laguna XS.260.8 | Margin→ 11.4 | MiniMax M372.2 |
| Math | Laguna XS.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M385.7 |
| Multimodal | Laguna XS.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M364.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 35.7%B 66%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 30.3Terminal-Bench 2.0: Laguna XS.2 scored 35.7%; MiniMax M3 scored 66%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 46.3%B 59%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 12.7SWE-bench Pro: Laguna XS.2 scored 46.3%; MiniMax M3 scored 59%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 69.9%B 80.5%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 10.6SWE-bench Verified: Laguna XS.2 scored 69.9%; MiniMax M3 scored 80.5%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Laguna XS.2 | MiniMax M3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Laguna XS.2$0 input / $0 output | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | Laguna XS.2 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Laguna XS.2Not available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Laguna XS.2Not available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Laguna XS.2256K | MiniMax M31M | MiniMax M3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticMiniMax M3 wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna XS.2 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 35.7% | 66% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| 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 | — | 1395 | Not 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 | — | 1110 | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 32.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 6.7% | Not comparable |
CodingMiniMax M3 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna XS.2 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 69.9% | 80.5% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 57.7% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 46.3% | 59% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 35.7% | 66.0% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 58.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 42.4% | 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 |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna XS.2 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna XS.2 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| USAMO 2026Source | — | 85.7% | Not comparable |
Multimodal7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna XS.2 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 1294 | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.6% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna XS.2 | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 82.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Laguna XS.2 or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 70 to 46. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 35.7% and 66%.
Which is better for coding, Laguna XS.2 or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 60.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Laguna XS.2 or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 72.3 versus 35.7. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.