Skip to main content

Model comparison

MAI-Thinking-1 vs o3-mini

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
OpenAI
47.41/100
1 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: MAI-Thinking-1 unranked (Not scored); o3-mini #136 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. MAI-Thinking-1 and o3-mini share 2 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to MAI-Thinking-1; 8 to o3-mini.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
2
MAI-Thinking-1 only
11
o3-mini only
8
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. MAI-Thinking-1 makes more sense if coding is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window; o3-mini is the better fit if instruction following is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

MAI-Thinking-1 and o3-mini finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

MAI-Thinking-1 gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for o3-mini.

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 MAI-Thinking-1 and o3-mini
CategoryMAI-Thinking-1Δo3-mini
CodingMAI-Thinking-165.5Margin 16.2o3-mini49.3
Inst. FollowingMAI-Thinking-185.0Margin 8.9o3-mini93.9
KnowledgeMAI-Thinking-172.5Margin 4.7o3-mini77.2
AgenticMAI-Thinking-146.0MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
MathMAI-Thinking-189.7MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · MAI-Thinking-1B · o3-mini
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 73.5%B 49.3%
    Winner: MAI-Thinking-1Δ 24.2
    SWE-bench Verified: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 73.5%; o3-mini scored 49.3%. MAI-Thinking-1 wins this benchmark.
  2. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 84.2%B 77.2%
    Winner: MAI-Thinking-1Δ 7
    GPQA: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 84.2%; o3-mini scored 77.2%. MAI-Thinking-1 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricMAI-Thinking-1o3-miniComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensMAI-Thinking-1Not availableo3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondMAI-Thinking-1Not availableo3-mini160 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenMAI-Thinking-1Not availableo3-mini7.12 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensMAI-Thinking-1256Ko3-mini200KMAI-Thinking-1 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1o3-miniResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 46%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 28.7%Not comparable
CodingMAI-Thinking-1 wins
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1o3-miniResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.5%49.3%MAI-Thinking-1 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 52.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 46.0%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 39.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1o3-miniResult
Graphwalks BFS 128KSource 90%Not comparable
Knowledgeo3-mini wins
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1o3-miniResult
GPQASource 84.2%77.2%MAI-Thinking-1 leads
GPQA-DSource 84.2%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 85%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 31%Not comparable
MMLUSource 86.9%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 19.0%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 74.8%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 8.7%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1o3-miniResult
AIME 2025Source 97%Not comparable
AIME26Source 94.5%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 84.9%Not comparable
AIME 2024Source 87.3%Not comparable
Inst. Followingo3-mini wins
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1o3-miniResult
IFBenchSource 85%Not comparable
IFEvalSource 93.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, MAI-Thinking-1 or o3-mini?

MAI-Thinking-1 and o3-mini are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, MAI-Thinking-1 or o3-mini?

o3-mini has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 72.5. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, MAI-Thinking-1 or o3-mini?

MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 65.5 versus 49.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, MAI-Thinking-1 or o3-mini?

o3-mini has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 93.9 versus 85. MAI-Thinking-1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.