Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) vs MiniMax M3
Head-to-head evidence from 28 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) unranked (Not scored); MiniMax M3 #15 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and MiniMax M3 share 28 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max); 17 to MiniMax M3.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 28
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) only
- 20
- MiniMax M3 only
- 17
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) makes more sense if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; MiniMax M3 is the better fit if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 28 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and MiniMax M3 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
MiniMax M3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max). DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M3 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Δ | MiniMax M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)95.2 | Margin← 9.5 | MiniMax M385.7 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)74.5 | Margin← 2.2 | MiniMax M372.3 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)70.9 | Margin→ 1.3 | MiniMax M372.2 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)60.1 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M364.9 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 55.4%B 59%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 3.6SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 55.4%; MiniMax M3 scored 59%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 67.9%B 66%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 1.9Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 67.9%; MiniMax M3 scored 66%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 83.4%B 83.5%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 0.1BrowseComp: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 83.4%; MiniMax M3 scored 83.5%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 80.6%B 80.5%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 0.1SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 80.6%; MiniMax M3 scored 80.5%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | MiniMax M3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)1M | MiniMax M31M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins23 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 67.9% | 66% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.4% | 83.5% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 48.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 73.6% | 74.2% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1307 | 1395 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 51.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 36.4% | 35.4% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 24.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 96.2% | 88.9% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 40.4% | 44.7% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 932 | 1110 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 40.4% | 32.1% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 84.4% | 88.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA ITBenchSource | 38.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 25.8% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 46.2% | 42.4% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 64% | 65.2% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 70.1% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 74.5% | Not comparable |
| GDPval rubricsSource | — | 74.7% | Not comparable |
| BankerToolBenchSource | — | 76.1% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 19.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 4.6% | Not comparable |
CodingMiniMax M3 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 3206.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.6% | 80.5% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 55.4% | 59% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 76.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 67.9% | 66.0% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 49.93% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 59.4% | 58.6% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 50.0% | 45.4% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| VIBE V2Source | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
| SVG-BenchSource | — | 63.7% | Not comparable |
| KernelBench HardSource | — | 28.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 57.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 37.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 44.3% | 44.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.8% | 92.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 35.9% | 37.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -10.0% | 1.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 43.3% | 15.0% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 94.0% | 16.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 50.0% | 33.3% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins5 benchmarks
Multimodal7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1264 | 1289 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 45.1% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 91.6% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.1% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.6% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 78.6% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 76.5% | 82.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or MiniMax M3?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and MiniMax M3 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 70.9. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or MiniMax M3?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 95.2 versus 85.7. MiniMax M3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or MiniMax M3?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 72.3. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.