K-EXAONE-236B-A23B vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 25.8. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 2.7x cheaper per token.
LG AI Research · MiniMax · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 25.8, ranking #29 overall.
On price, MiniMax M3.1 Flash is roughly 2.7x 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 K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
- you want predictable pricing at $0.60/M input and $1.00/M output
Choose MiniMax M3.1 Flash
- overall performance matters — it scores 48.7 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
- cost matters — it's about 2.7x 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.
Individual benchmarks
6 reported for K-EXAONE-236B-A23B · 15 for MiniMax M3.1 Flash
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B 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
For input processing, K-EXAONE-236B-A23B ($0.60/1M tokens) is 4.0x more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).
For output processing, K-EXAONE-236B-A23B ($1.00/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.60/1M tokens).
In conclusion, K-EXAONE-236B-A23B is more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
MiniMax M3.1 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to K-EXAONE-236B-A23B's 32,768 tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while K-EXAONE-236B-A23B is limited to 32,768 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas K-EXAONE-236B-A23B does not.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.
Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.
Proprietary
Closed source
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B was released on 2025-12-31, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 10 months newer than K-EXAONE-236B-A23B.
Dec 31, 2025
9 months ago
Oct 19, 2026
3 days ago
9mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-10-01, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm K-EXAONE-236B-A23B's training data extends to 2025-10-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiniMax M3.1 Flash's cutoff date.
Oct 2025
—
Provider Availability
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B is available from FriendliAI. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is available from MiniMax.
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against K-EXAONE-236B-A23B and MiniMax M3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about K-EXAONE-236B-A23B vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash.