MiniMax M2.7 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 35.4. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 2.0x cheaper per token.
MiniMax · MiniMax · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 35.4, ranking #29 overall.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, MiniMax M3.1 Flash wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, MiniMax M3.1 Flash is roughly 2.0x 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 MiniMax M2.7
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
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 value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 2.0x 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.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
11 reported for MiniMax M2.7 · 15 for MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax M2.7 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash is better at 1 benchmark (NL2Repo).
MiniMax M3.1 Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, MiniMax M2.7 ($0.30/1M tokens) is 2.0x more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).
For output processing, MiniMax M2.7 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 2.0x more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.60/1M tokens).
In conclusion, MiniMax M2.7 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 MiniMax M2.7's 196,608 tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while MiniMax M2.7 is limited to 196,608 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniMax M2.7 does not.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
MiniMax M2.7
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
License
Usage and distribution terms
MiniMax M2.7 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.
MIT
Open weights
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
MiniMax M2.7 was released on 2026-03-18, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 7 months newer than MiniMax M2.7.
Mar 18, 2026
7 months ago
Oct 19, 2026
0 days ago
7mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
MiniMax M2.7 is available from Fireworks, MiniMax, Novita, DeepInfra. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is available from MiniMax.
MiniMax M2.7
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against MiniMax M2.7 and MiniMax M3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about MiniMax M2.7 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash.