Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Sol vs MiniMax-M3
GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.4 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M3 costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 40 shared benchmarks.
MiniMaxSummary
- They share 40 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher in 10 categories and MiniMax-M3 in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.6 Sol leads 85.5 to 39.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 83% for GPT-5.6 Sol and 18% for MiniMax-M3.
- MiniMax-M3 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for GPT-5.6 Sol.
- GPT-5.6 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiniMax-M3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | MiniMax |
| Noometry Index | 64.4 | 43.5 |
| Released | 2026-07-09 | 2026-06-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 512K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $4 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $20 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 64 | 41 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 61.1 (#7), MiniMax-M3: 41.5 (#111)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 47.5% | 14.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1619 | 1482 |
| SciCode | 57.1% | 47.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1493 | 1470 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,177 | 640.02 |
| DeepSWE | 72.7% | — |
| CursorBench | 41.7% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 32.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 89.4% | — |
| MirrorCode | 20% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 50.2 (#7), MiniMax-M3: 22.5 (#121)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 51.4% | 37.7% |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 27.3% | 4.6% |
| GBAEval | 52.6% | 0.9% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,619 | 2,158 |
| τ²-bench Banking | 46.9% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 36.2% | — |
| BALROG | 60% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.7% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1257 | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 74.7 (#6), MiniMax-M3: 29.3 (#83)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 71.7% | 45.8% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 93.8% | 65.1% |
| CritPt | 32.3% | 3.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 64% | 14% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1447 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | 8% |
| DTBench | 96% | 78.9% |
| LMCA | 59.2% | 33.7% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 93.1% | 55% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 161.99 | 147 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 92.5% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 37.1% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 44.8% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.4 |
Math GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 85.5 (#7), MiniMax-M3: 39.1 (#83)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 71.1% |
| ProofBench | 83% | 18% |
| LMArena Math | 1472 | 1432 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 89.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 82.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 64.3 (#16), MiniMax-M3: 58.4 (#32)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.5% | 90.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1517 | 1462 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 69.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.4% | — |
Multimodal GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 48.9 (#8), MiniMax-M3: 39.5 (#45)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1281 | 1254 |
| LMArena Document | 1483 | 1435 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.6% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 56.7% | — |
Multilingual GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 55.4 (#32), MiniMax-M3: 53.2 (#70)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1450 | 1420 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1523 | 1465 |
| LMArena French | 1475 | 1445 |
| LMArena German | 1476 | 1424 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1475 | 1381 |
| LMArena Korean | 1434 | 1372 |
| LMArena Russian | 1466 | 1430 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1449 | 1431 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 77.8 (#16), MiniMax-M3: 75.7 (#56)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1480 | 1433 |
Long Context GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 45.3 (#42), MiniMax-M3: 44.2 (#68)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1445 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.6 Sol leads
GPT-5.6 Sol: 73.5 (#12), MiniMax-M3: 62.3 (#79)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiniMax-M3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1456 | 1433 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1450 | 1405 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1250 | 1150 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1441 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1972 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.6 Sol better than MiniMax-M3?
GPT-5.6 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 64.4 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. MiniMax-M3 costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.6 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.6 Sol or MiniMax-M3?
MiniMax-M3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Sol lists at $4 and $20.
Is GPT-5.6 Sol or MiniMax-M3 better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 61.1 versus 41.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.6 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.6 Sol and MiniMax-M3 share?
40 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.6 Sol has 64 scored results on Noometry and MiniMax-M3 has 41.