GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI 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 27.2 points higher (42.7 vs 15.5) but costs 12× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $23.0; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when you need intelligence above 15.5, and GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) when 15.5 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 15.5 | 42.7 | +175.5% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 2.8× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $22.97 | $283.18 | +1132.8% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 12× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 5.06s | 21.63s | +327.5% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 327.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning): 175.5% more intelligence, 1132.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 327.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
GPT-5.6 Luna (Non-reasoning)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/gpt-5-6-luna-non-reasoning/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-non-reasoning/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill