Model comparison

MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

MiniMax-M2.1 MiniMax

38.4

Rank #177 Confirmed

Step 3.7 Flash StepFun

36.5

Rank #207 Reported

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. MiniMax-M2.1 scores higher in 1 category and Step 3.7 Flash in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 40.9 to 35.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 11.2% for MiniMax-M2.1 and 39.7% for Step 3.7 Flash.
  • Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.18 / $1.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $1.20 for MiniMax-M2.1.
  • Step 3.7 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 205K.

Side by side

MiniMax-M2.1 and Step 3.7 Flash specifications
MiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
ProviderMiniMaxStepFun
Noometry Index38.436.5
Released2025-12-232026-05-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window205K256K
Max output131K256K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$1.20$1.11
Results tracked225

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

MiniMax-M2.1: 40.1 (#132), Step 3.7 Flash: 39.4 (#147)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
ALE-Bench623.83694.12
LMArena WebDev1384—
SciCode—40%
LMArena Coding1421—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 27.7 (#91), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
Terminal-Bench36.6%—

Reasoning Step 3.7 Flash leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 15.8 (#301), Step 3.7 Flash: 20.9 (#211)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
NYT Connections (extended)11.2%39.7%
CritPt—2.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts1410—

Math Step 3.7 Flash leads

MiniMax-M2.1: 35.6 (#142), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.9 (#74)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—68.5%
LMArena Math1396—

Knowledge Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 37.7 (#143), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%—
LMArena Expert1432—

Multilingual Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 50.2 (#123), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English1378—
LMArena Chinese1430—
LMArena French1405—
LMArena German1380—
LMArena Japanese1287—
LMArena Korean1297—
LMArena Russian1386—
LMArena Spanish1396—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 74.0 (#108), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1399—

Long Context Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 43.2 (#98), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1416—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

MiniMax-M2.1: 58.5 (#114), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiniMax-M2.1Step 3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1392—
LMArena Creative Writing1362—
LMArena Multi-Turn1396—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiniMax-M2.1 better than Step 3.7 Flash?

MiniMax-M2.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.4 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiniMax-M2.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $1.11 per million output tokens; MiniMax-M2.1 lists at $0.30 and $1.20.

Is MiniMax-M2.1 or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (40.1 vs 39.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks do MiniMax-M2.1 and Step 3.7 Flash share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiniMax-M2.1 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.

Related comparisons

Go deeper