Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Flash vs MiniMax M3
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2-Flash unranked; MiniMax M3 #18
BenchAlign evidence: MiMo-V2-Flash supported; MiniMax M3 supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MiMo-V2-Flash and MiniMax M3 share 17 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to MiMo-V2-Flash; 28 to MiniMax M3.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 3
- MiniMax M3 only
- 28
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 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 57. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
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 MiMo-V2-Flash. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. MiMo-V2-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. MiniMax M3 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
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 | MiMo-V2-Flash | Δ | MiniMax M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 | Margin← 1.2 | MiniMax M372.2 |
| Agentic | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M372.3 |
| Knowledge | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
| Math | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M385.7 |
| Multimodal | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M364.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.4%B 80.5%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 7.1SWE-bench Verified: MiMo-V2-Flash scored 73.4%; 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 | MiMo-V2-Flash | MiniMax M3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiMo-V2-Flash$0 input / $0 output | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | MiMo-V2-Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | MiniMax M31M | MiniMax M3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 12.0% | 35.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 83.9% | 88.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 16.7% | 44.7% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 833 | 1395 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 66% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 83.5% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 70.1% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.2% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 74.5% | 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 |
CodingMiMo-V2-Flash wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.4% | 80.5% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 49.8% | 58.6% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 25.8% | 42.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 25.9% | 45.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 59% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 66.0% | 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 |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 84.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 24.7% | 44.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 65.6% | 92.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 8.0% | 37.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -48.5% | 1.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 15.2% | 15.0% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.1% | 16.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | 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 | MiMo-V2-Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 39.9% | 82.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, MiMo-V2-Flash or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 70 to 57. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.4% and 80.5%.
Which is better for coding, MiMo-V2-Flash or MiniMax M3?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 72.2. Inside this category, AA-SciCode 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.