DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash by MiniMax? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) scores 2.4 points higher (45.1 vs 42.7) but costs 1.6× as much to run the benchmark ($445 vs $283; both mid-range class). Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise MiniMax-M3.1-Flash.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.1 | 42.7 | −5.3% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 5.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $444.60 | $283.18 | −36.3% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 36.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.12s | 22.73s | +41.0% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 41.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 5.3% less intelligence, 36.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 41.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)MiniMax-M3.1-FlashToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill