Ling-3.0-flash-Fin vs MiniMax M3
Wins 0 of 5 areas
—
Wins 4 of 5 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Long documents
MiniMax M3 is the stronger all-rounder.Ling-3.0-flash-Fin is cheaper.
Scores updated · 15 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software02MiniMax M32 of 2 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02MiniMax M32 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own12MiniMax M32 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01MiniMax M31 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Ling-3.0-flash-Fin costs 80% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where MiniMax M3 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+21.1points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+16.4points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+9.3points ahead
Where Ling-3.0-flash-Fin pulls ahead
- Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+23.3points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+1.2points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 15 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingMiniMax M3
- SciCodeMiniMax M3 by 4.742.447.1+4.7
- Terminal-Bench 2.1MiniMax M3 by 2.762.565.2+2.7
AgentsMiniMax M3
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingLing-3.0-flash-Fin by 23.338.615.3+23.3
- GDPValMiniMax M3 by 6.830.337.1+6.8
- Terminal-Bench 4.0MiniMax M3 by 202+2
- AA ApexAgentstie27.427.7tie
ReasoningMiniMax M3
- Humanity's Last ExamMiniMax M3 by 16.422.639+16.4
- CritPtMiniMax M3 by 1.12.63.7+1.1
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationMiniMax M3 by 21.160.581.6+21.1
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyLing-3.0-flash-Fin by 1.217.916.7+1.2
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ³-Bench BankingLing-3.0-flash-Fin by 284113+28
- AA-OmniscienceMiniMax M3 by 16-14.61.4+16
- Finance Agent v2Ling-3.0-flash-Fin by 11.559.848.3+11.5
- AA IntelligenceMiniMax M3 by 6.622.629.2+6.6
Questions people ask
Which is better, Ling-3.0-flash-Fin or MiniMax M3?
MiniMax M3 wins four of the five areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning and long documents. Ling-3.0-flash-Fin wins none, but costs 80% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
MiniMax M3. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Ling-3.0-flash-Fin wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Ling-3.0-flash-Fin costs $0.07 per million input tokens and $0.22 per million output tokens; MiniMax M3 costs $0.30 and $1.20. That makes Ling-3.0-flash-Fin about 80% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 15 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.