Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiniMax M1
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax M1 costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and MiniMax M1 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.5 Flash leads 62.8 to 26.9.
- MiniMax M1 is cheaper at $0.55 / $2.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $9 for Gemini 3.5 Flash.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiniMax M1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | MiniMax | |
| Noometry Index | 54.2 | 40.3 |
| Released | 2026-05-19 | 2025-06-13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 40K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.50 | $0.55 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $9 | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 49.4 (#49), MiniMax M1: 39.9 (#153)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1492 | 1359 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 79.3% | — |
| DeepSWE | 37.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1499 | — |
| SciCode | 53.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 62.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 911.02 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 24.7 (#114), MiniMax M1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 27.5% | — |
| GBAEval | 6.7% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,396 | — |
Reasoning Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 62.8 (#18), MiniMax M1: 26.9 (#126)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1488 | 1339 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 72.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 76.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | — |
| CritPt | 13.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 50% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 25.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 4.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 32% | — |
| DTBench | 94.7% | — |
| LMCA | 47.1% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 58.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.46 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59 | — |
Math Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 60.7 (#36), MiniMax M1: 37.5 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1504 | 1361 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 62.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 31% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 39% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 14.6% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 66.3 (#11), MiniMax M1: 36.4 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1495 | 1317 |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 66.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.7 (#15), MiniMax M1: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1310 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.6% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1463 | — |
Multilingual Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 57.0 (#13), MiniMax M1: 45.8 (#163)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1476 | 1319 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1526 | 1360 |
| LMArena French | 1490 | 1370 |
| LMArena German | 1492 | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1486 | 1217 |
| LMArena Korean | 1451 | 1266 |
| LMArena Russian | 1493 | 1329 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1480 | 1353 |
Instruction Following Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 77.0 (#30), MiniMax M1: 69.3 (#174)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1467 | 1312 |
Long Context Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.4 (#38), MiniMax M1: 41.4 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | 1326 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 69.4% |
Writing & Preference Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash: 65.5 (#47), MiniMax M1: 53.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1482 | 1343 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1470 | 1298 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1481 | 1335 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1087 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash better than MiniMax M1?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax M1 costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M1?
MiniMax M1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.55 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.5 Flash lists at $1.50 and $9.
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M1 better for coding?
Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.4 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.5 Flash and MiniMax M1 share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax M1 has 18.