Model comparison
MiniMax M3 vs o4-mini (high)
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: MiniMax M3 #15 (Supported); o4-mini (high) #118 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MiniMax M3 and o4-mini (high) share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 45 results are unique to MiniMax M3; 2 to o4-mini (high).
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- MiniMax M3 only
- 45
- o4-mini (high) only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o4-mini (high) only becomes the better choice if you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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 BenchAlign aggregate, 69.75 to 49.98. 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 mathematics, where it averages 85.7 against 20.2.
o4-mini (high) 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 200K for o4-mini (high).
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | MiniMax M3 | o4-mini (high) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | o4-mini (high)Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiniMax M3Not available | o4-mini (high)161 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiniMax M3Not available | o4-mini (high)21.94 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiniMax M31M | o4-mini (high)200K | MiniMax M3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiniMax M3 | o4-mini (high) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| 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 | 88.4% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 42.4% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 65.2% | — | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiniMax M3 | o4-mini (high) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 59% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 66.0% | — | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | 42.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 58.6% | — | 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 |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiniMax M3 | o4-mini (high) | 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 |
MathMiniMax M3 wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiniMax M3 | o4-mini (high) | 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 | 1289 | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 78.6% | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiniMax M3 | o4-mini (high) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 82.9% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, MiniMax M3 or o4-mini (high)?
MiniMax M3 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 69.75 to 49.98.
Which is better for math, MiniMax M3 or o4-mini (high)?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 85.7 versus 20.2. o4-mini (high) stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.