ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

LightOnOCR-3 0.8B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash comes out ahead, 66 to 30 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. LightOn

    LightOnOCR-3 0.8B

    Released Oct 8, 2026New

    30/100
    • ECI—
    • Price—
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove LightOnOCR-3 0.8B
  2. Our pick

    MiniMax

    MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

    Released Oct 19, 2026New

    66/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is our pick

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against LightOnOCR-3 0.8B (30). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax-M3.1-Flash $0.263 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · LightOnOCR-3 0.8B unpriced
  • Longest contextMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax-M3.1-Flash 1,000,000 · LightOnOCR-3 0.8B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsMiniMax-M3.1-FlashLightOnOCR-3 0.8B: Text, Images · MiniMax-M3.1-Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingLightOnOCR-3 0.8BPublishes downloadable weights (apache-2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLightOnOCR-3 0.8BMiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Inputs & features60%2570
Context window40%3760
Overall100%30/10066/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

LightOnOCR-3 0.8B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationLightOnOCR-3 0.8BLightOnMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input—$0.15
Output—$0.60
Cached input—$0.015
Blended (3:1)—$0.263
Long-context rate—Same rate
Price source—Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens512,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningNoYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingNoYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenapache-2.0Proprietary
API model ID—MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
API providers125 (best)
ReleasedOct 8, 2026Oct 19, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • LightOnOCR-3 0.8B—
  • MiniMax-M3.1-Flash$2.70
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: LightOnOCR-3 0.8B or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against LightOnOCR-3 0.8B (30). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, LightOnOCR-3 0.8B or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.263 per million tokens for MiniMax-M3.1-Flash versus . LightOnOCR-3 0.8B has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. LightOnOCR-3 0.8B has not been scored yet and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for LightOnOCR-3 0.8B and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that LightOnOCR-3 0.8B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for LightOnOCR-3 0.8B. Maximum output per response: LightOnOCR-3 0.8B up to 16,384, MiniMax-M3.1-Flash up to 512,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

LightOnOCR-3 0.8B accepts text and images; MiniMax-M3.1-Flash accepts text, images and video. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

LightOnOCR-3 0.8B publishes its weights (apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the newest, released Oct 19, 2026. LightOnOCR-3 0.8B came out Oct 8, 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons