MiniMax-M3 vs Qwen3.7 Flash vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Flash comes out ahead, 79 to 70 and 69 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
MiniMax
MiniMax-M3
69/100- ECI147.0
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context1.05M
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3.7 Flash
79/100- ECI144.6
- Price$0.03 / $0.13
- Context1M
Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3.7 Plus
70/100- ECI147.4
- Price$0.40 / $1.60
- Context1M
Qwen3.7 Flash is our pick
Qwen3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Qwen3.7 Plus (70) and MiniMax-M3 (69). It leads on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityQwen3.7 PlusCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4 · MiniMax-M3 147.0 · Qwen3.7 Flash 144.6
- Lowest priceQwen3.7 FlashQwen3.7 Flash $0.055 · MiniMax-M3 $0.525 · Qwen3.7 Plus $0.70 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiniMax-M3MiniMax-M3 1,048,576 · Qwen3.7 Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3.7 Plus 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMiniMax-M3: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.7 Flash: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.7 Plus: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingMiniMax-M3Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | MiniMax-M3 | Qwen3.7 Flash | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 74 | 71 | 75 |
| Price | 25% | 63 | 100 | 57 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 70 | 80 | 80 |
| Context window | 10% | 61 | 60 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 69/100 | 79/100 | 70/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 147.0 | 144.6 | 147.4 (best) |
| ECI rank | #62 of 148 | #80 of 148 | #61 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 90.9% (best) | 82.3% | 87.9% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 19.3% | 34.4% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 71.1% | 86.7% | 93.3% (best) |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.03 (best) | $0.40 |
| Output | $1.20 | $0.13 (best) | $1.60 |
| Cached input | $0.06 | $0.003 (best) | $0.04 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.525 | $0.055 (best) | $0.70 |
| Long-context rate | Over 512K: $0.60 / $2.40 | Over 32K: $0.10 / $0.40 | Over 256K: $1.20 / $4.80 |
| Price source | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API | Official Alibaba API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 512,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens | 64,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | MiniMax-M3 | qwen3.7-flash | qwen3.7-plus |
| API providers | 42 (best) | 12 | 25 |
| Released | Jun 1, 2026 | Jul 15, 2026 | Jun 2, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | Apr 2025 |
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$5.40
Qwen3.7 Flash$0.56
Qwen3.7 Plus$7.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiniMax-M3, Qwen3.7 Flash or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Qwen3.7 Plus (70) and MiniMax-M3 (69). It leads on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M3, Qwen3.7 Flash or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.13 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). MiniMax-M3 costs $0.30 input / $1.20 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 $0.055 per million tokens for Qwen3.7 Flash versus $0.525 for MiniMax-M3 (9.5× as much) and $0.70 for Qwen3.7 Plus (13× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4 (#61 of 148), MiniMax-M3 147.0 (#62 of 148) and Qwen3.7 Flash 144.6 (#80 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (145.7–148.9 vs 142.7–149.8), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — MiniMax-M3 90.9%, Qwen3.7 Plus 87.9%, Qwen3.7 Flash 82.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.7 Plus 93.3%, Qwen3.7 Flash 86.7%, MiniMax-M3 71.1%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniMax-M3, Qwen3.7 Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.7 Plus leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax-M3 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen3.7 Flash and 1,000,000 for Qwen3.7 Plus. Maximum output per response: MiniMax-M3 up to 512,000, Qwen3.7 Flash up to 131,072, Qwen3.7 Plus up to 64,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiniMax-M3 accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.7 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?
MiniMax-M3 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.7 Flash is the newest, released Jul 15, 2026. Qwen3.7 Plus came out Jun 2, 2026; MiniMax-M3 came out Jun 1, 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 Oct 4, 2026.