The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 20.8. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 1.8x cheaper per token.

MiniMax · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 20.8, ranking #29 overall.

On price, MiniMax M3.1 Flash is roughly 1.8x 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 48.5 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 1.8x 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 Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
48.5
#29
20.8
#213
Reasoning
45.8
#34
20.9
#205
Coding
37.8
#23
12.1
#170
Agents
35.6
#23
5.3
#167
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.15 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$0.60 / M
$1.00 / M
Context window
1,000,000
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Tool use
26.8#30
12.5#120
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

14 reported for MiniMax M3.1 Flash · 10 for Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

No common benchmarks found

MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instructdon'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

MiniMax M3.1 Flash costs less

For input processing, MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.60/1M tokens) is 1.7x cheaper than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct ($1.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is more expensive than MiniMax M3.1 Flash.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Oct 20 2026 • llm-stats.com
MiniMax
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.60
Best providerMiniMax
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiniMax M3.1 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct's 262,144 tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is limited to 262,144 tokens.

MiniMax
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output524,288 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Tue Oct 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct does not.

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

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

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

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19, while Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct was released on 2025-01-31.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 21 months newer than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Oct 19, 2026

-2 days ago

1.7yr newer
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

Jan 31, 2025

1.7 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

Provider Availability

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is available from MiniMax. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is available from DeepInfra.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

minimax logo
MiniMax
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct.

Which is better, MiniMax M3.1 Flash or Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 20.8. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is made by MiniMax and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct 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 Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct 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%. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct scores TAU-bench Retail: 77.5%, SWE-Bench Verified: 69.6%, BFCL-v3: 68.7%, Aider-Polyglot: 61.8%, TAU-bench Airline: 60.0%.

Is MiniMax M3.1 Flash cheaper than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 2.0x cheaper for input tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.60/M output via minimax. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct costs $0.30/M input and $1.00/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct supports 262K 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 Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (48.5 vs 20.8), context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($0.15 vs $0.30/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

MiniMax M3.1 Flash is developed by MiniMax and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons