The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MAI-Code-1-Flash vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 28.6.

Microsoft · MiniMax · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 28.6, ranking #29 overall.

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

Choose MAI-Code-1-Flash

  • you are already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem

Choose MiniMax M3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 48.7 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MAI-Code-1-Flash
Microsoft
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
28.6
#155
48.7
#29
Reasoning
28.2
#152
45.9
#32
Coding
19.0
#127
37.9
#23
Agents
11.1
#134
35.7
#22
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.60 / M
Context window
—
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
MAI-Code-1-Flash
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Tool use
10.1#144
27.1#27
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

15 reported for MAI-Code-1-Flash · 15 for MiniMax M3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

MAI-Code-1-Flash 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

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only MiniMax M3.1 Flash specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only MiniMax M3.1 Flash specifies output context (524,288 tokens).

Microsoft
MAI-Code-1-Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
MiniMax
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output524,288 tokens
Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas MAI-Code-1-Flash does not.

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

MAI-Code-1-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

MAI-Code-1-Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MAI-Code-1-Flash was released on 2026-06-02, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 5 months newer than MAI-Code-1-Flash.

MAI-Code-1-Flash

Jun 2, 2026

4 months ago

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Oct 19, 2026

0 days ago

4mo 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MAI-Code-1-Flash and MiniMax M3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MAI-Code-1-Flash
✓ Preferred
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MAI-Code-1-Flash vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash.

Which is better, MAI-Code-1-Flash or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 28.6. MAI-Code-1-Flash is made by Microsoft 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 MAI-Code-1-Flash compare to MiniMax M3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

MAI-Code-1-Flash scores AIME 2026: 92.5%, GPQA: 84.6%, IFBench: 75.0%, Tau2 Telecom: 71.7%, SWE-Bench Verified: 71.6%. MiniMax M3.1 Flash scores BabyVision: 91.0%, CharXiv-R: 82.5%, CyberGym: 82.2%, BankerToolBench: 76.2%, DeepSWE 1.1: 73.7%.

What are the context window sizes for MAI-Code-1-Flash and MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

MAI-Code-1-Flash supports an unknown number of 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 MAI-Code-1-Flash and MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (28.6 vs 48.7), multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MAI-Code-1-Flash and MiniMax M3.1 Flash?

MAI-Code-1-Flash is developed by Microsoft and MiniMax M3.1 Flash is developed by MiniMax.

Related comparisons