The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 33.8. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 1.2x cheaper per token.

DeepSeek · MiniMax · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 33.8, ranking #29 overall.

On price, MiniMax M3.1 Flash is roughly 1.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose MiniMax M3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 48.5 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 1.2x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
DeepSeek
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
33.8
#115
48.5
#29
Reasoning
32.4
#122
45.8
#34
Coding
18.6
#128
37.8
#23
Agents
10.9
#134
35.6
#23
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.28 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$0.42 / M
$0.60 / M
Context window
131,072
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Tool use
10.2#144
26.8#30
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

8 reported for DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale · 14 for MiniMax M3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and MiniMax M3.1 Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiniMax M3.1 Flash costs less

For input processing, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale ($0.28/1M tokens) is 1.9x more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale ($0.42/1M tokens) is 1.4x cheaper than MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.60/1M tokens).

In conclusion, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Input tokens$0.28
Output tokens$0.42
Best providerDeepSeek
MiniMax
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.60
Best providerMiniMax
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiniMax M3.1 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale's 131,072 tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is limited to 131,072 tokens.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
MiniMax
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output524,288 tokens
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale does not.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is licensed under MIT, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

MIT

Open weights

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale was released on 2025-12-01, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 11 months newer than DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

Dec 1, 2025

10 months ago

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Oct 19, 2026

0 days ago

10mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is available from DeepSeek. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is available from MiniMax.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.28/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.42/1M

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

minimax logo
MiniMax
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and MiniMax M3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
✓ Preferred
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash.

Which is better, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 33.8. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is made by DeepSeek and MiniMax M3.1 Flash is made by MiniMax. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale compare to MiniMax M3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale scores HMMT 2025: 99.2%, AIME 2025: 96.0%, CodeForces: 90.0%, t2-bench: 80.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 73.1%. MiniMax M3.1 Flash scores BabyVision: 91.0%, CharXiv-R: 82.5%, CyberGym: 82.2%, BankerToolBench: 76.2%, DeepSWE 1.1: 73.7%.

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale cheaper than MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 1.9x cheaper for input tokens. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs $0.28/M input and $0.42/M output via deepseek. MiniMax M3.1 Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.60/M output via minimax.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale supports 131K tokens and MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (33.8 vs 48.5), context window (131K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.28 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is developed by DeepSeek and MiniMax M3.1 Flash is developed by MiniMax.

Related comparisons