The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs QvQ-72B-Preview

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 7.6.

MiniMax · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 7.6, ranking #29 overall.

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

Choose MiniMax M3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 48.5 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose QvQ-72B-Preview

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax
QvQ-72B-Preview
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
48.5
#29
7.6
#306
Reasoning
45.8
#34
8.0
#298
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.15 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.60 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
QvQ-72B-Preview
Vision
28.8#42
6.2#166
Multimodal
30.2#38
9.4#137
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

14 reported for MiniMax M3.1 Flash · 4 for QvQ-72B-Preview

No common benchmarks found

MiniMax M3.1 Flash and QvQ-72B-Previewdon'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).

MiniMax
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output524,288 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QvQ-72B-Preview
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Oct 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both MiniMax M3.1 Flash and QvQ-72B-Preview support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

QvQ-72B-Preview

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while QvQ-72B-Preview uses Qwen.

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

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

QvQ-72B-Preview

Qwen

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19, while QvQ-72B-Preview was released on 2024-12-25.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 22 months newer than QvQ-72B-Preview.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Oct 19, 2026

-2 days ago

1.8yr newer
QvQ-72B-Preview

Dec 25, 2024

1.8 years ago

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 MiniMax M3.1 Flash and QvQ-72B-Preview side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
QvQ-72B-Preview
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs QvQ-72B-Preview.

Which is better, MiniMax M3.1 Flash or QvQ-72B-Preview?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 7.6. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is made by MiniMax and QvQ-72B-Preview is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does MiniMax M3.1 Flash compare to QvQ-72B-Preview in benchmarks?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash scores BabyVision: 91.0%, CharXiv-R: 82.5%, CyberGym: 82.2%, BankerToolBench: 76.2%, DeepSWE 1.1: 73.7%. QvQ-72B-Preview scores MathVista: 71.4%, MMMU: 70.3%, MathVision: 35.9%, OlympiadBench: 20.4%.

What are the context window sizes for MiniMax M3.1 Flash and QvQ-72B-Preview?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and QvQ-72B-Preview supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between MiniMax M3.1 Flash and QvQ-72B-Preview?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (48.5 vs 7.6), licensing (Proprietary vs Qwen). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiniMax M3.1 Flash and QvQ-72B-Preview?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is developed by MiniMax and QvQ-72B-Preview is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons