Model Comparison
M3
vs. Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · MiniMax, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Mi M3 8 metric wins Strongest on: Intelligence, GPQA, HLE
Best Value
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct
100.0 value score
59.6 reasoning / $0.36/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct
$0.20/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct
59.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
M3
58.6 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct is 1.5x cheaper on input tokens than M3.
Speed gap
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct generates about 1.3x as many tokens per second as M3.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct leads M3 by 1.5 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
M3 wins 8 measurable categories, including Intelligence, GPQA, HLE, SciCode.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
M3
MiniMax
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Mi M3 | Al Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.20/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.20/1M | $0.82/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.52/1M | $0.36/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | MiniMax | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Jun 1, 2026 | Jul 21, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 55.1 tok/s | 68.9 tok/s |
| TTFT | 2125ms | 1123ms |
| Latency | 38437ms | 1123ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 66.2 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 58.1 | 59.6 |
| Intelligence | 44.4 | 18.2 |
| Coding | 58.6 | — |
| Math | — | 71.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 92.9% | 75.3% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 82.8% |
| HLE | 37.1% | 10.6% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 52.4% |
| MATH 500 | — | 98.0% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 71.7% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 71.7% |
| SciCode | 45.4% | 36.0% |
| LCR | 74.0% | 31.2% |
| IFBench | 82.9% | 46.1% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 88.9% | 33.3% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 42.4% | 15.2% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct offers the best value at $0.20/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct has the strongest reasoning profile with a 59.6 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
M3 reaches a 58.6 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
M3
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 Instruct
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
