Data as of October 19, 2026 · How the score is built
Released Oct 19, 20261M contextMiniMax M3.1 Flash launch post
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Decision readingMiniMax M3.1 Flash scores 63.4 out of 100 and ranks #41 of 226. This profile shows 12 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Agentic at #35. API pricing is $0.15 input and $0.6 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.015.
Released Oct 19, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Capability
63.4/100
field median 50#41 of 226 ranked models
Public
#41of 226
Verified —
Price
$0.15input / $0.60 output
input median $0.75cached $0.015 · blended $0.38
Speed
Not measured
field median 94.5 tok/sTime to first token not measured
Context
1Mtokens
field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately
Strongest published evidence
Agentic ranks #35. Particularly useful for coding agents, browser research, and computer-use workflows.
Validate before choosing
12 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Independent runtime speed has not been measured.
Source-linked · 12 displayable benchmark rows
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #35 of 130Percentile 74thWeight 22%6 benchmarksVerified | 58.2 | 6 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingWeight 20%3 benchmarksVerified | Score pending | 3 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MultimodalRank Not rankedWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified | 66.4 | 2 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| KnowledgeRank Not rankedWeight 12%1 benchmarkVerified | 67.8 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
12 of 682 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic6/6 verified
- Coding3/3 verified
- ReasoningNot measured
- Multimodal2/2 verified
- Knowledge1/1 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- MathNot measured
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash category percentile values
- Agentic74th percentile
- CodingNot eligible
- ReasoningNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- KnowledgeNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#35/130
- CodingNot ranked
- ReasoningNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- KnowledgeNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | Score73.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 79.0% | Gap5.3 behind | Weight15% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| PostTrainBench v1.1 | Score39.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 49.3% | Gap10 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| NL2Repo | Score61.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 68.2% | Gap7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Agentic6 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | Score38.10% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 70.60% | Gap32.5 behind | Weight8% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| AutomationBench | Score62.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MiniMax M3.1 Flash · 62.2% | GapBest verified | Weight6% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Agents' Last Exam | Score29.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 59.3% | Gap29.7 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| BankerToolBench | Score76.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Hy4 preview · 78.6% | Gap2.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| OSWorld 2.0 | Score61.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 72.6% | Gap10.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CyberGym | Score82.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MiMo-V2.6-Flash · 95.1% | Gap12.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Multimodal2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score82.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5% | Gap11 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Provider exact |
| BabyVision w/ PythonBabyVision with Python | Score91.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 92.5% | Gap1.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Knowledge1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without tools | Score43.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 64.4% | Gap21 behind | Weight7% ref. weight | Provider exact |
Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value
All 12 rowsWhat it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash · 63.4 score · $0.38 blended per million tokens
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Flash-reasoning
MiniMax M3.1 Flash PreviewSpec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- MiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax: M3.1 Flash launch post
- Context window
- 1MMiniMax: M3.1 Flash launch post
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Released October 19, 2026 on the MiniMax API as `MiniMax-M3.1-Flash` (1M context, tunable thinking depth), in M Plan and in MiniMax Code. MiniMax says model weights will be released later, so this row stays Proprietary until they are published.
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Current
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Published at $0.015 per million cached input tokensMiniMax: M3.1 Flash launch post
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash ranks #41 of 226 on the public leaderboard with a score of 63.4/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is a proprietary model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Released October 19, 2026 on the MiniMax API as `MiniMax-M3.1-Flash` (1M context, tunable thinking depth), in M Plan and in MiniMax Code. MiniMax says model weights will be released later, so this row stays Proprietary until they are published.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash sits in the MiniMax M3.1 Flash family with MiniMax M3.1 Flash Preview. Its explicit predecessor is MiniMax M3.1 Flash Preview. 12 of 682 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Agentic at #35. particularly useful for coding agents, browser research, and computer-use workflows.
Last updated October 19, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Questions
How does MiniMax M3.1 Flash perform overall in AI benchmarks?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash ranks #41 out of 226 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 63.4/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 12 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is MiniMax M3.1 Flash good for knowledge and understanding?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash has source-displayable benchmark coverage for knowledge and understanding, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is MiniMax M3.1 Flash good for coding and programming?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash has source-displayable benchmark coverage for coding and programming, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is MiniMax M3.1 Flash good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash ranks #35 out of 130 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 58.2/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is MiniMax M3.1 Flash good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash has source-displayable benchmark coverage for multimodal and grounded tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Which sibling models are related to MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash belongs to the MiniMax M3.1 Flash family. Related tracked variants include MiniMax M3.1 Flash Preview. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.
Does MiniMax M3.1 Flash have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. MiniMax M3.1 Flash currently has 12 source-displayable rows across 682 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.