MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Muse Glimmer-30B
MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 35.2. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 2.0x cheaper per token.
MiniMax · Meta · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.7 to 35.2, 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 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
Choose Muse Glimmer-30B
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
15 reported for MiniMax M3.1 Flash · 32 for Muse Glimmer-30B
MiniMax M3.1 Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (CharXiv-R), while Muse Glimmer-30B is better at 0 benchmarks.
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 M3.1 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.60/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Muse Glimmer-30B 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 Muse Glimmer-30B's 131,072 tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while Muse Glimmer-30B is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Muse Glimmer-30B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Muse Glimmer-30B
License
Usage and distribution terms
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Muse Glimmer-30B uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19, while Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 2 months newer than Muse Glimmer-30B.
Oct 19, 2026
0 days ago
2mo newerAug 10, 2026
2 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Muse Glimmer-30B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-04, while MiniMax M3.1 Flash's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Muse Glimmer-30B's training data extends to 2026-01-04, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiniMax M3.1 Flash's cutoff date.
—
Jan 2026
Provider Availability
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is available from MiniMax. Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Muse Glimmer-30B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Muse Glimmer-30B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Muse Glimmer-30B.