MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max
MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max are closely matched at 48.7 and 50.7 on the LLM Stats Score. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 9.4x cheaper per token.
MiniMax · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 48.7 and 50.7.
In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, MiniMax M3.1 Flash wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, MiniMax M3.1 Flash is roughly 9.4x 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
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 3 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 9.4x 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 Qwen3.8 Max
- 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 · 42 for Qwen3.8 Max
MiniMax M3.1 Flash outperforms in 2 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, NL2Repo), while Qwen3.8 Max is better at 1 benchmark (Agents' Last Exam).
MiniMax M3.1 Flash shows notably better performance in the majority of 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 11.0x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max ($1.65/1M tokens).
For output processing, MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.60/1M tokens) is 8.3x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max ($4.95/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3.8 Max 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 Qwen3.8 Max's 256,000 tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while Qwen3.8 Max is limited to 256,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Qwen3.8 Max
License
Usage and distribution terms
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.8 Max uses Qwen3.8-Max License.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Qwen3.8-Max License
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
MiniMax M3.1 Flash was released on 2026-10-19, while Qwen3.8 Max was released on 2026-08-02.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is 3 months newer than Qwen3.8 Max.
Oct 19, 2026
1 days ago
2mo newerAug 2, 2026
2 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is available from MiniMax. Qwen3.8 Max is available from DeepInfra, Fireworks, Novita, Together.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Qwen3.8 Max
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against MiniMax M3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max.