Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) by Anthropic or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash by MiniMax? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash scores 13.2 points higher (42.7 vs 29.5) but costs 8.3× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $34.3; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when you need intelligence above 29.5, and Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) when 29.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 29.5 | 42.7 | +44.7% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 44.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $34.31 | $283.18 | +725.4% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 8.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.45s | 21.66s | +89.2% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 89.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low): 44.7% more intelligence, 725.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 89.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low)MiniMax-M3.1-FlashToday's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-low/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-low/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill