GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) 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 8.1 points higher (42.7 vs 34.6) but costs 1.6× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $179; both mid-range class). Pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh).
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.6 | 42.7 | +23.4% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 23.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $179.33 | $283.18 | +57.9% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 57.9% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 45.80s | 21.63s | −52.8% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 52.8% faster |
| 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 (Xhigh): 23.4% more intelligence, 57.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 52.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) scores 41.30 for $175.
- 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 (Xhigh)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-xhigh/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-xhigh/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill