Llama 4 Maverick vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Maverick by Meta 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 33.4 points higher (42.7 vs 9.3) but costs 6.4× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $44.0; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Maverick | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.3 | 42.7 | +359.1% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 4.6× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $43.98 | $283.18 | +543.9% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 6.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.37s | 22.62s | +118.1% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 118.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.92 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Llama 4 Maverick: 359.1% more intelligence, 543.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 118.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Maverick 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.
Llama 4 MaverickMiniMax-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/llama-4-maverick/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-maverick/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill