GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-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 4.2× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $66.8; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when you need intelligence above 34.6, and GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) when 34.6 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-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) | $66.81 | $283.18 | +323.9% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 4.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.32s | 21.66s | −23.5% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 23.5% faster |
| 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 GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh): 23.4% more intelligence, 323.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 23.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
GPT-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-6-luna-xhigh/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-luna-xhigh/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill