Llama 4 Scout vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Scout by Meta or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash by MiniMax? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.

Trade-off

MetaLlama 4 ScoutOff the frontier

Intelligence: 6.50
Total cost: $73.6

MiniMaxMiniMax-M3.1-FlashOff the frontier

Intelligence: 42.70
Total cost: $283

Verdict

Depends on your budget

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash scores 36.2 points higher (42.7 vs 6.5) but costs 3.8× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $73.6; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.

Metric	Llama 4 Scout	MiniMax-M3.1-Flash	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	6.5	42.7	+556.9% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 6.6× more intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$73.56	$283.18	+285.0% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 3.8× more expensive
End-to-end time (lower is better)	4.99s	22.73s	+355.5% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 355.5% slower
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)	$0.18 / $0.66	$0.15 / $0.60
Input modalities	Text, Image	Text, Image

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Llama 4 Scout: 556.9% more intelligence, 285.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 355.5% slower end-to-end.

Open this matchup in the interactive picker Llama 4 Scout: what beats it MiniMax-M3.1-Flash: what beats it

Today's Pareto frontier

Against the frontier

Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
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 ScoutMiniMax-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-scout/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill