ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview vs Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling 3.1 Flash

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview comes out ahead, 66 to 57 and 36 on our weighted score.

  1. Our pick

    MiniMax

    MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview

    Released Sep 27, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI—
    • Price—
    • Context1M
  2. Google

    Gemma 4 12B IT

    Released Jun 9, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.075 / $0.275
    • Context262K
  3. inclusionAI

    Ling 3.1 Flash

    Released Sep 29, 2026

    36/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.075 / $0.22
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview is our pick

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Gemma 4 12B IT (57) and Ling 3.1 Flash (36). It leads on 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 priceLing 3.1 FlashLing 3.1 Flash $0.111 · Gemma 4 12B IT $0.125 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview unpriced
  • Longest contextMiniMax-M3.1-Flash-PreviewMiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview 1,000,000 · Gemma 4 12B IT 262,144 · Ling 3.1 Flash 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsMiniMax-M3.1-Flash-PreviewMiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview: Text, Images, Video · Gemma 4 12B IT: Text, Images · Ling 3.1 Flash: Text
  • Self-hostingGemma 4 12B ITPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniMax-M3.1-Flash-PreviewGemma 4 12B ITLing 3.1 Flash
Inputs & features60%707035
Context window40%603737
Overall100%66/10057/10036/100

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.

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview vs Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling 3.1 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniMax-M3.1-Flash-PreviewMiniMaxGemma 4 12B ITGoogleLing 3.1 FlashinclusionAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input—$0.075$0.075
Output—$0.275$0.22 (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)—$0.125$0.111 (best)
Long-context rate—Same rateSame rate
Price source—Median of 2 providersMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output512,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoYesNoNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model ID———
API providers—23 (best)
ReleasedSep 27, 2026Jun 9, 2026Sep 29, 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.

  • MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview—
  • Gemma 4 12B IT$1.30
  • Ling 3.1 Flash$1.19
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview, Gemma 4 12B IT or Ling 3.1 Flash?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Gemma 4 12B IT (57) and Ling 3.1 Flash (36). It leads on 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, MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview, Gemma 4 12B IT or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.22 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Gemma 4 12B IT costs $0.075 input / $0.275 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.111 per million tokens for Ling 3.1 Flash versus $0.125 for Gemma 4 12B IT (1.1× as much). MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview has not been scored yet, Gemma 4 12B IT has not been scored yet and Ling 3.1 Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview, Gemma 4 12B IT and Ling 3.1 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Gemma 4 12B IT and 262,144 for Ling 3.1 Flash. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview up to 512,000, Gemma 4 12B IT up to 32,768, Ling 3.1 Flash up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview accepts text, images and video; Gemma 4 12B IT accepts text and images; Ling 3.1 Flash accepts text. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Gemma 4 12B IT publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Ling 3.1 Flash is the newest, released Sep 29, 2026. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash-Preview came out Sep 27, 2026; Gemma 4 12B IT came out Jun 9, 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.