ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

MiniCPM5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash

Step 3.7 Flash comes out ahead, 62 to 53 on our weighted score, though MiniCPM5-2B is 33% cheaper per token.

  1. OpenBMB

    MiniCPM5-2B

    Released Sep 6, 2026

    53/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.124 / $0.743
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove MiniCPM5-2B
  2. Our pick

    StepFun

    Step 3.7 Flash

    Released May 29, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.185 / $1.11
    • Context256K
    Full specs Remove Step 3.7 Flash

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Step 3.7 Flash is our pick

Step 3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against MiniCPM5-2B (53). It leads on inputs & features and context window. MiniCPM5-2B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. 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 priceMiniCPM5-2BMiniCPM5-2B $0.279 · Step 3.7 Flash $0.416 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextStep 3.7 FlashStep 3.7 Flash 256,000 · MiniCPM5-2B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsStep 3.7 FlashMiniCPM5-2B: Text · Step 3.7 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniCPM5-2BStep 3.7 Flash
Price50%7668
Inputs & features30%3570
Context window20%2436
Overall100%53/10062/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. 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.

MiniCPM5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniCPM5-2BOpenBMBStep 3.7 FlashStepFun
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.124 (best)$0.185
Output$0.743 (best)$1.11
Cached input—$0.037
Blended (3:1)$0.279 (best)$0.416
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial StepFun (Global) API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens256,000 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens256,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenapache-2.0Open
API model ID—step-3.7-flash
API providers118 (best)
ReleasedSep 6, 2026May 29, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Mar 1, 2026
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.

  • MiniCPM5-2B$2.73
  • Step 3.7 Flash$4.07
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniCPM5-2B or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against MiniCPM5-2B (53). It leads on inputs & features and context window. MiniCPM5-2B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, MiniCPM5-2B or Step 3.7 Flash?

MiniCPM5-2B is cheaper at $0.124 input / $0.743 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.185 input / $1.11 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.279 per million tokens for MiniCPM5-2B versus $0.416 for Step 3.7 Flash (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. MiniCPM5-2B has not been scored yet and Step 3.7 Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniCPM5-2B and Step 3.7 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 131,072 for MiniCPM5-2B. Maximum output per response: MiniCPM5-2B up to 131,072, Step 3.7 Flash up to 256,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniCPM5-2B accepts text; Step 3.7 Flash accepts text, images and video. Step 3.7 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

MiniCPM5-2B is the newest, released Sep 6, 2026. Step 3.7 Flash came out May 29, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Step 3.7 Flash Mar 1, 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons