Qwen3.7 Plus vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash comes out ahead, 70 to 63 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.7 Plus
63/100- ECI147.1
- Price$0.40 / $1.60
- Context1M
- Our pick
MiniMaxMiniMax-M3.1-Flash
70/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.60
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
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 sameQwen3.7 Plus 1,000,000 · MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3.7 Plus: Text, Images, Video · MiniMax-M3.1-Flash: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.7 Plus | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 55 | 74 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 63/100 | 70/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.7 PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | MiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | $0.40 | $0.15 (best) |
| Output | $1.60 | $0.60 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.08 | $0.015 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.70 | $0.263 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Over 256K: $1.20 / $4.80 | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 64,000 tokens | 512,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | qwen3.7-plus | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash |
| API providers | 25 | 25 |
| Released | Jun 2, 2026 | Oct 19, 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.
- Qwen3.7 Plus$7.20
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash$2.70
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.7 Plus or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash?
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, Qwen3.7 Plus 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). 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. Qwen3.7 Plus has an ECI of 147.1 and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.7 Plus and MiniMax-M3.1-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?
Qwen3.7 Plus and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.7 Plus up to 64,000, MiniMax-M3.1-Flash up to 512,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.7 Plus accepts text, images and video; MiniMax-M3.1-Flash accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
No. Qwen3.7 Plus and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 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.
Related comparisons
- Add MiniMax-M3Three-way comparison
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs MiniMax-M3MiniMax · ECI 146.9
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.0
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs Gemini 3.5 Flash LiteGoogle · ECI 145.0
- Qwen3.7 Plus vs GPT-5.4 nanoOpenAI · ECI 146.1
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12BNVIDIA
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Kolibri 1Aleph Alpha
