ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Qwen3.7 Plus

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash comes out ahead, 70 to 63 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    MiniMax

    MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

    Released Oct 19, 2026New

    70/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Plus

    Released Jun 2, 2026

    63/100
    • ECI147.1
    • Price$0.40 / $1.60
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Plus

  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 70/100 against Qwen3.7 Plus (63). It leads on price. Qwen3.7 Plus wins on inputs & features. 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 priceMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax-M3.1-Flash $0.263 · Qwen3.7 Plus $0.70 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameMiniMax-M3.1-Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3.7 Plus 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsMiniMax-M3.1-Flash: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.7 Plus: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniMax-M3.1-FlashQwen3.7 Plus
Price50%7455
Inputs & features30%7080
Context window20%6060
Overall100%70/10063/100

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.

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Qwen3.7 Plus specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMaxQwen3.7 PlusAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—147.1
ECI rank—#71 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—87.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—93.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.15 (best)$0.40
Output$0.60 (best)$1.60
Cached input$0.015 (best)$0.08
Blended (3:1)$0.263 (best)$0.70
Long-context rateSame rateOver 256K: $1.20 / $4.80
Price sourceOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output512,000 tokens (best)64,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · maxYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDMiniMax-M3.1-Flashqwen3.7-plus
API providers2525
ReleasedOct 19, 2026Jun 2, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Apr 2025
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$2.70
  • Qwen3.7 Plus$7.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniMax-M3.1-Flash or Qwen3.7 Plus?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Qwen3.7 Plus (63). It leads on price. Qwen3.7 Plus wins on inputs & features. 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, MiniMax-M3.1-Flash or Qwen3.7 Plus?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.40 input / $1.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 $0.70 for Qwen3.7 Plus (2.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash has not been scored yet and Qwen3.7 Plus has an ECI of 147.1.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M3.1-Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus 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?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M3.1-Flash up to 512,000, Qwen3.7 Plus up to 64,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.7 Plus accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

No. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the newest, released Oct 19, 2026. Qwen3.7 Plus came out Jun 2, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.7 Plus Apr 2025.

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