MiniMax M2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
MiniMax M2.1 leads Step 3.7 Flash on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 19.5, at about the same output price ($1.20 vs $1.15 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.
MiniMax M2.1 or Step 3.7 Flash: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick MiniMax M2.1 for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 15
- MiniMax M2.1 only
- 19
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 3
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
MiniMax M2.1
MiniMax M2.1 leads, 20.9 against 19.5.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has a GPQA Diamond result, 78.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has a AIME result, 77.9%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has a MMLU Pro result, 87.0%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
MiniMax M2.1
MiniMax M2.1 leads, 1201 against 1196.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash takes 262K tokens against 205K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Step 3.7 Flash
MiniMax M2.1 $0.0009, Step 3.7 Flash $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has the number, $0.59.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked, Step 3.7 Flash not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 13.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- τ²-Bench Telecom: MiniMax M2.1 85.4% against Step 3.7 Flash 98.5%, 13.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 against Step 3.7 Flash $1.15 per million output tokens, 1.0x apart.
- Context window
- MiniMax M2.1 takes 205K tokens, Step 3.7 Flash 262K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | MiniMax M2.1 | Bars | Step 3.7 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| Web design | 6 | 1 | ||
| General | 1 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 10 | 5 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 39.6 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 81.8% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 74.8% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 81.0% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 43.9% | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 28.8% | 35.6% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Terminal-Bench | 36.6% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 623.8 | 694.1 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 20.9 | 19.5 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 85.4% | 98.5% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 78.5% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 83.0% | 80.9% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.2% | 21.4% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 77.9% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 89.0% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 87.8% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| AA Math Index | 82.7 | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.7% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 87.0% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 75.5% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 55.8% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 58.9% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 66.3% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 91.2% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 34.1% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 87.5% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1201 | 1196 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1223 | 1179 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1134 | 1158 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1206 | 1172 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1165 | 1129 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1190 | 1182 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1132 | 1085 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1152 | Only Step 3.7 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 80.8% | Not measured | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| IFBench | 69.9% | 67.3% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 67.7% | 73.7% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 43 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | MiniMax M2.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Step 3.7 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Step 3.7 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Step 3.7 Flash costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | MiniMax M2.1 | StepFun Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | MiniMax | StepFun |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | December 23, 2025 | May 28, 2026 |
| Context window | 205K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.30 | $0.20 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.20 | $1.15 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.59 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is MiniMax M2.1 better than Step 3.7 Flash for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M2.1 for work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M2.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?
MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20 and $1.15. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.1 only.
Which has the bigger context window, MiniMax M2.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash, with 262K tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks is the MiniMax M2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash comparison based on?
15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. MiniMax M2.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Step 3.7 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.