Model comparison
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiniMax M3
Head-to-head evidence from 26 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #33 (Estimated); MiniMax M3 #15 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 3.5 Flash and MiniMax M3 share 26 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to Gemini 3.5 Flash; 19 to MiniMax M3.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 26
- Gemini 3.5 Flash only
- 20
- MiniMax M3 only
- 19
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemini 3.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 26 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiniMax M3 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 69.75 to 64.75. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiniMax M3's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 85.7 against 32.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 76.2% to 66%. Gemini 3.5 Flash does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.50 input / $9.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens for MiniMax M3. That is roughly 7.5x on output cost alone. Gemini 3.5 Flash 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 | Gemini 3.5 Flash | Δ | MiniMax M3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Gemini 3.5 Flash32.9 | Margin→ 52.8 | MiniMax M385.7 |
| Multimodal | Gemini 3.5 Flash83.8 | Margin← 18.9 | MiniMax M364.9 |
| Coding | Gemini 3.5 Flash53.9 | Margin→ 18.3 | MiniMax M372.2 |
| Agentic | Gemini 3.5 Flash77.2 | Margin← 4.9 | MiniMax M372.3 |
| Reasoning | Gemini 3.5 Flash74.7 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
| Knowledge | Gemini 3.5 Flash47.2 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Gemini 3.5 Flash76.3 | MarginNo overlap | MiniMax M3Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 76.2%B 66%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 10.2Terminal-Bench 2.0: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 76.2%; MiniMax M3 scored 66%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 78.4%B 70.1%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 8.3OSWorld-Verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 78.4%; MiniMax M3 scored 70.1%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 83.6%B 78.1%Winner: Gemini 3.5 FlashΔ 5.5MMMU-Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 83.6%; MiniMax M3 scored 78.1%. Gemini 3.5 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 55.1%B 59%Winner: MiniMax M3Δ 3.9SWE-bench Pro: Gemini 3.5 Flash scored 55.1%; MiniMax M3 scored 59%. MiniMax M3 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash$1.5 input / $9 output | MiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 output | MiniMax M3 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 3.5 Flash284.2 tok/s | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 3.5 Flash18.55 s | MiniMax M3Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 3.5 Flash1M | MiniMax M31M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash wins23 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 76.2% | 66% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 83.6% | 74.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| ToolathlonSource | 56.5% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 78.4% | 70.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| Finance Agent v2Source | 57.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1349 | 1395 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.3% | 88.9% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 42.4% | 44.7% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 37.5% | 35.4% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 47.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 61.85% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 18.0% | 19.8% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 42.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 50.1% | 32.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 40.9% | 42.4% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 83.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 74.5% | Not comparable |
| GDPval rubricsSource | — | 74.7% | Not comparable |
| BankerToolBenchSource | — | 76.1% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 4.6% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1110 | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 88.4% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
CodingMiniMax M3 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 76.2% | 66.0% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 55.1% | 59% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| SciCodeSource | 53.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 48.68% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | 49.8% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 48.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 70.1% | 58.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.1% | 45.4% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.1% | Not comparable |
| VIBE V2Source | — | 50.1% | Not comparable |
| SVG-BenchSource | — | 63.7% | Not comparable |
| KernelBench HardSource | — | 28.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 50.2% | 44.4% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| GPQASource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 40.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 51.9% | 15.0% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 60.7% | 16.1% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.2% | 92.9% | MiniMax M3 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 41.0% | 37.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 22.7% | 1.4% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 33.3% | Not comparable |
MathMiniMax M3 wins3 benchmarks
MultimodalGemini 3.5 Flash wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.5 Flash | MiniMax M3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivSource | 84.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | 83.6% | 78.1% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| Blueprint-Bench 2Source | 33.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 84.3% | 78.6% | Gemini 3.5 Flash leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1285 | 1289 | MiniMax M3 leads |
| OfficeQA ProSource | — | 45.1% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 91.6% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 84.6% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 69.75 to 64.75. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 76.2% and 66%.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 53.9. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 85.7 versus 32.9. Gemini 3.5 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 72.3. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiniMax M3?
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 64.9. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro 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.