MiniMax M3

GALatest Flagship

by MiniMax · MiniMax M family · best for low-cost multimodal coding agents

CodingReasoningMultimodalCost-OptimizedOpen-WeightsLong-Context
8.0
AI Panel Score
Value 9.4/10

MiniMax M3 is MiniMax's flagship M-series model, released on the MiniMax API on 2026-06-01 with open weights on Hugging Face from 2026-06-12. It is a roughly 428B-parameter mixture-of-experts (about 23B active per token) trained on text, images and video from the first step, with a 1M-token context built on MiniMax's own sparse attention and up to 524,288 output tokens. At $0.30 in / $1.20 out per 1M tokens it is the cheapest first-party flagship among its open-weights peers. Two things set the buying decision: most of its benchmark claims are MiniMax's own runs, and the weights license grants free use only for non-commercial purposes. Commercial use carries attribution and notice duties, and businesses above US$20 million in yearly revenue need MiniMax's prior written authorization.

What's new

  • Native multimodality: M3 accepts images and video alongside text. MiniMax's M2.x models accept text and tool calls only.
  • Context grows from 204,800 tokens (M2.7) to 1,000,000, and the output ceiling rises from 204,800 to 524,288 tokens.
  • MiniMax Sparse Attention (MSA) replaces the full attention MiniMax used in M2. MiniMax reports 9x faster prefill and 15x faster decode than M2 at 1M context, with per-token compute cut to one twentieth.
  • Reasoning becomes switchable: M3's thinking parameter accepts disabled or adaptive, while M2.x models always think.
  • Vendor-reported gains over M2.7: Terminal-Bench 2.1 from 51.1 to 66.0, MCP Atlas from 49.4 to 74.2, SWE-bench Pro from 56.2 to 59.0, BrowseComp from 76.3 to 83.5.
  • Pricing holds at M2.7's $0.30 / $1.20 for requests up to 512K input tokens. MiniMax shows these rates as a permanent 50% discount off a $0.60 / $2.40 list price. M3 adds a long-context tier above 512K input and a Priority tier at 1.5x. The default rate limit is lower: 200 requests per minute against 500 for M2.7.

Benchmarks

BenchmarkScoreSource
MMMU78.1%huggingface.co 2026-06-12T00:00:00.000Z
LMArena Elo1441lmarena.ai 2026-09-13T00:00:00.000Z
Terminal-Bench66%huggingface.co 2026-06-12T00:00:00.000Z
LMArena Coding Elo1496lmarena.ai 2026-09-13T00:00:00.000Z
SWE-bench Verified80.5%huggingface.co 2026-06-12T00:00:00.000Z

AI Panel Review

Six personas, six verdicts — the same panel that reviews every product on TopReviewed.

Decision Maker7.5/10
“Cheapest open flagship with vision and 1M context, but the license starts at non-commercial. Past US$20M in revenue, MiniMax must sign off first.”

M3 offers open weights, native multimodality and a 1M window at about a quarter of GLM-5.3's rate card. The catch is the license, not the capability. Every peer named here grants commercial rights up front and adds conditions only at very large scale. M3's grant is non-commercial, commercial use needs public attribution and a notice, and any business over US$20M in yearly revenue needs MiniMax's written authorization. That turns the usual open-weights exit option into a negotiation. The license's definition of commercial use also names commercial use of APIs serving the model, so confirm with MiniMax which duties apply to API customers. Vendor maturity is the other gap: no compliance certifications, no safety framework, and self-hosting still labelled experimental.

Strategic Fit 7.5Vendor Risk 6.5Roadmap Confidence 8
Pros
  • Frontier-adjacent agentic coding at the lowest flagship price
  • native multimodal input in one model
  • a hosted API that avoids self-hosting risk
Cons
  • Restrictive weights license weakens the open-weights exit
  • no certifications or safety framework
  • self-hosting still experimental
Right for: cost-driven teams buying through the API, and small companies that can meet the attribution and notice terms
Avoid if: you are a large enterprise that needs unconditional rights to self-host and modify the weights
Domain Strategist8.5/10
“The only open flagship that sees images and video, reads 1M tokens and costs $0.30 in. That is a real wedge, even if the license dulls it.”

Among the current open-weights flagships, M3 holds a position nobody else occupies. GLM-5.3 and DeepSeek V4-Pro are text-only, Kimi K3 has vision but costs ten times more on input, and Qwen3.8-Max costs nearly seven times more. MiniMax is aiming at multimodal coding and "cowork" agents that read documents, charts and recordings, a segment the text-only peers cannot serve alone. The long-horizon terminal result shows the agent story has substance. Two things limit the moat. LMArena's human-preference ranking puts M3 well below the peers for general chat. And the non-commercial license keeps it out of the self-hosted enterprise deals where open weights usually win.

Competitive Positioning 8.5Differentiation 9Market Timing 8
Pros
  • Unique combination of open weights, native vision and video, 1M context and the lowest price
  • strong independent long-horizon agent result
  • broad host coverage with 13 providers on OpenRouter
Cons
  • Weak general-chat preference ranking
  • license undercuts the open-weights narrative with enterprises
Right for: strategies built on cheap multimodal agents
Avoid if: your market position depends on broad general-chat quality or unencumbered model ownership
Finance Lead9/10
“About $14 per 1,000 cached agent turns against about $59 on GLM-5.3. Just keep prompts under 512K, where the per-token rate doubles.”

Take an agent turn with 100K input tokens (90K cache hits) and 5K output. At first-party rates it costs about $0.0144 on M3, against $0.0185 on DeepSeek V4-Pro off-peak ($0.037 peak), $0.059 on GLM-5.3, $0.065 on Qwen3.8-Max and $0.132 on Kimi K3. Automatic caching needs no setup. MiniMax labels the discount "permanent", but it is a displayed discount off a $0.60 / $2.40 list price. Budget three variables: requests above 512K input bill at double the rate, thinking tokens bill as output and thinking is on by default on the OpenAI-style endpoint, and Priority admission costs 1.5x. No batch tier exists.

Cost Efficiency 9.5Pricing Transparency 8Value per Dollar 9.5
Pros
  • Lowest flagship rate card among open peers
  • cheap automatic caching
  • flat monthly Token Plan option from $22
Cons
  • Long-context tier doubles rates above 512K
  • no batch discount
  • the discount framing and a caching example quoting list prices make the rate card less clear
Right for: budget owners of high-volume agent traffic that stays under 512K per request
Avoid if: your requests routinely exceed 512K tokens or you depend on batch discounts
Domain Practitioner8/10
“Point Claude Code or the OpenAI SDK at it and it just works, video included. Missing JSON mode and ignored stop sequences are the rough edges.”

Integration is easy: the Anthropic-compatible endpoint is MiniMax's recommended path, supports thinking blocks and interleaved thinking between tool calls, and works with existing Anthropic and OpenAI SDKs. Image and video content blocks behave as documented, with a Files API for videos up to 512 MB. The friction is in details. Thinking is off by default on the Anthropic endpoint but on by default on the OpenAI one. stop_sequences and top_k are silently ignored. There is no JSON-schema output mode. The default limit is 200 RPM. Self-hosting uses an SGLang development image that MiniMax calls experimental, validated only to 128K input. Budget integration tests before migrating production agents.

API Ergonomics 8Tool/Agent Support 8.5Reliability 7.5
Pros
  • Drop-in Anthropic and OpenAI compatibility
  • interleaved thinking for tool loops
  • native image and video blocks
  • huge output ceiling
Cons
  • No structured output mode
  • ignored stop sequences
  • inconsistent thinking defaults across endpoints
  • experimental self-host path
Right for: builders running Claude Code-style agents who want a cheap multimodal backend
Avoid if: your system depends on strict JSON-schema output or stop sequences
Power User7.5/10
“Great value for agent work and reading screenshots or PDFs, yet in plain side-by-side chat people still prefer GLM, Kimi and DeepSeek answers.”

As a daily driver through MiniMax Code, a Token Plan or an aggregator, M3 is at its best on hands-on technical work. It reads documents, charts and screen recordings well, stays on task through long agentic sessions and costs little. General conversation is weaker. LMArena's blind human-preference votes put it at 1441, 84th overall, well below GLM-5.3 (1483), Kimi K3 (1485) and DeepSeek V4-Pro (1463). Expect competent answers that seldom stand out on writing or open-ended reasoning. MiniMax quotes 100+ tokens per second, which feels quick when thinking is off, but reasoning mode adds noticeable wait.

Output Quality 7.5Speed 7.5Everyday Usefulness 7.5
Pros
  • Strong on documents, screenshots and video
  • long agent sessions hold together
  • very cheap per task
Cons
  • Middling human-preference ranking for chat
  • thinking mode slows replies
  • no published writing or multilingual benchmarks
Right for: technical users who work with files and visuals
Avoid if: you mainly want the best conversational or writing partner
Skeptic7/10
“A vendor table on vendor infrastructure against rivals' older models, and a product page still saying 'soon open-sourced' months after the weights.”

Discount most of the scoreboard. Twelve of the fourteen results cited here are MiniMax's own runs, with Claude Code scaffolding and an overridden system prompt. Rivals' Terminal-Bench numbers come from a different source than M3's, IMO scores used up to 10 test-time iterations, and the open-weights comparisons are against GLM-5.1 and Kimi K2.6 rather than GLM-5.3 or Kimi K3. Independent data is thin and mixed. Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench backs the agentic claim, but LMArena ranks it 84th. The 1M context is guaranteed only to 512K, the product page still promises open-sourcing that already happened, and the "open-weight" label hides a non-commercial grant.

Claim Accuracy 6.5Weakness Severity 7Hype vs Reality 6.5
Pros
  • Weights are public, so claims can be checked
  • one independent long-horizon result supports the agentic positioning
  • pricing and license terms are published in full
Cons
  • Mostly vendor-run numbers with mixed provenance
  • comparisons against outdated rival versions
  • "open-weight" marketing overstates commercial freedom
Right for: buyers who run their own task evals and read licenses before deploying
Avoid if: you pick models from vendor benchmark tables

Strengths

  • The lowest first-party flagship price among open-weights peers: $0.30 / $1.20 with $0.06 cache hits, about a quarter of GLM-5.3's rate card
  • Native image and video input in an open-weights flagship with a 1M context; GLM-5.3 and DeepSeek V4-Pro are text-only
  • Top open-weights score on the independent Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench (38.5), consistent with its agentic-coding positioning
  • Document understanding leads MiniMax's comparison table (OmniDocBench 91.6), useful for PDF-heavy and screenshot-driven agents
  • Anthropic- and OpenAI-compatible endpoints make it a drop-in backend for Claude Code-style tools and existing SDKs
  • A 524,288-token output ceiling and switchable thinking

Limitations

  • The weights license grants only non-commercial rights by default; commercial use needs attribution and a notice, and above US$20M yearly revenue MiniMax's prior written authorization
  • Most benchmark rows are vendor-run on internal infrastructure with mixed harness provenance; LMArena places it 84th (1441), well behind GLM-5.3, Kimi K3 and DeepSeek V4-Pro
  • No schema-constrained output or JSON mode on M3, and the Anthropic endpoint ignores stop_sequences
  • The API guarantees only 512K of the 1M context, requests over 512K input bill at double the rate, and the default limit is 200 RPM
  • Self-hosting is labelled experimental by MiniMax itself, with SGLang validation up to 128K input and no validated video serving
  • No safety framework, compliance certifications or training-data opt-out; knowledge cutoff undisclosed

Best use cases

High-volume coding and terminal agents on the MiniMax API. At $0.30 / $1.20 with automatic $0.06 caching, long agent loops cost a fraction of other flagships. The independent long-horizon terminal result suggests M3 stays on task.

Multimodal agents that read documents, screenshots or screen recordings. Pick M3 when you want that in one open model and don't want to pair a text model with a vision model. OmniDocBench and Video-MME are its strongest published results.

Research, evaluation and internal prototyping on self-hosted weights. The non-commercial grant fits these cleanly.

Startups under US$20M in revenue that can meet the attribution and notice terms and want open weights as a fallback.

It is not the pick for large enterprises that need unconditional commercial rights to the weights, or for workloads that need strict JSON-schema output.

Deep dive

The full research notes behind this review — verified against primary sources.

Architecture

M3 is a sparse mixture-of-experts language model with a vision encoder. The weights hold 427.0B parameters (the model card rounds this to ~428B), and about 23B are active per token. The published config lists 60 layers: the first three use dense feed-forward blocks, and the remaining 57 use 128 routed experts plus one shared expert, with four routed experts chosen per token by sigmoid scoring. The same 57 layers use MiniMax Sparse Attention, a block-sparse design built on grouped-query attention (64 query heads, 4 key-value heads); the first three keep dense attention. A lightweight index branch scores 128-token key-value blocks and keeps the top 16 for each group, and exact attention then runs only over those blocks. The MSA paper (arXiv 2606.13392) reports that on a 109B test model MSA matched GQA quality while cutting per-token attention compute 28.4x at 1M context. The vision side is a 32-layer ViT-style encoder with 14-pixel patches, images up to 2,016 pixels per side and 3D rotary positions for video. The vocabulary is 200,064 tokens, and the config carries multi-token-prediction modules for speculative decoding. MiniMax does not disclose training-token count, compute or knowledge cutoff.

Capabilities

Coding (8.8) and agentic work (8.8) are the design center. MiniMax reports SWE-bench Verified 80.5 and SWE-bench Pro 59.0, level with DeepSeek V4-Pro's 80.6 and ahead of GLM-5.1's 58.4 in MiniMax's own table. The strongest outside signal is the independent Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench: M3 scores 38.5, the best open-weights result on that board. Tool use backs up the agentic score (MCP Atlas 74.2, BrowseComp 83.5, OSWorld-Verified 75.2, all vendor-reported), and interleaved thinking between tool calls is a documented API feature. Vision (8.5) and document OCR (8.5) are real differentiators among open flagships: MMMU-Pro 78.1, Video-MME 85.4 and OmniDocBench 91.6, which tops every model in MiniMax's comparison table. Function calling (8.5) is strong, but M3 has no schema-constrained output mode: MiniMax's response_format works only with the older MiniMax-Text-01. Reasoning and math (8.0 each) rest on IMO 2025 at 35/42 and USAMO 2026 at 36/42. Those were produced with up to 10 test-time-scaling iterations and a 512K output budget, and MiniMax publishes no GPQA or HLE score. Long context (8.0) has the architecture for 1M, but the only long-context figure is LOCA-Bench at 256K (49.3 against Claude Opus 4.7's 57.0), and the API guarantees only 512K. Multilingual (8.0), instruction following (8.0) and creative writing (7.0) have no published benchmarks; LMArena's text ranking (1441, mid-table) is the only outside read on everyday chat quality. Real-time data (6.0) comes from a server-side web_search tool, in beta at $0.01 per request. Safety calibration (6.5) reflects a built-in content filter but no published safety framework.

Benchmark analysis

Benchmark Score vs Predecessor (M2.7) vs Top Competitor Source
SWE-bench Verified 80.5 79.9 Claude Opus 4.7 87.6; DeepSeek V4-Pro 80.6 MiniMax model card
SWE-bench Pro 59.0 56.2 Claude Opus 4.7 64.3; GLM-5.1 58.4 MiniMax model card
Terminal-Bench 2.1 66.0 51.1 GPT-5.5 78.2 MiniMax model card
MCP Atlas 74.2 49.4 Claude Opus 4.7 77.0; DeepSeek V4-Pro 73.6 MiniMax model card
BrowseComp 83.5 76.3 Gemini 3.1 Pro 85.9 MiniMax model card
OSWorld-Verified 75.2 not reported Claude Opus 4.7 82.8 MiniMax model card
MMMU-Pro 78.1 text-only predecessor GPT-5.5 81.2 MiniMax model card
OmniDocBench 91.6 text-only predecessor leads the table (Claude Opus 4.7 89.3) MiniMax model card
Video-MME (with subtitles) 85.4 text-only predecessor GPT-5.5 89.4 MiniMax model card
IMO 2025 35 / 42 not reported GPT-5.5 76.1% MiniMax model card
Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench 38.5 not listed GPT-5.5 44.5; next open model Kimi K2.7-Code 36.7 LHTB leaderboard
LMArena Text Elo 1441 M2.5 1390 (M2.7 not listed) Kimi K3 1485; GLM-5.3 1483 LMArena

Every row except the last two is vendor-reported from MiniMax's model card, and the harnesses matter. MiniMax ran SWE-bench and most coding rows on its own infrastructure with Claude Code as the scaffold and an overridden system prompt, averaged over four runs. It took the Terminal-Bench 2.1 scores for GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Opus 4.7 from the official leaderboard but ran M3 and the other models on its own infrastructure with a 128K output cap. The IMO and USAMO scores used up to 10 test-time-scaling iterations. The open-weights peers in MiniMax's table are older releases (GLM-5.1, Kimi K2.6), not the current GLM-5.3 or Kimi K3. The two independent results point in different directions. On Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench, a 46-task suite run with the Terminus-2 harness in a July 2026 snapshot, M3 is the top open-weights model, ahead of GLM-5.2 (31.6) and DeepSeek V4-Pro (30.7), though GLM-5.3 and Kimi K3 are not yet on that board. On LMArena's human-preference text leaderboard (vote cutoff 2026-09-13, 48,540 votes), M3 ranks 84th of 402 at 1441, well behind GLM-5.3, Kimi K3 and DeepSeek V4-Pro (1463). Artificial Analysis figures were not available to read (its site sits behind a bot checkpoint), so that column stays empty.

Speed & latency

No independent throughput or time-to-first-token measurement of the MiniMax API was available, so both fields stay null. MiniMax's own docs quote about 100+ output tokens per second for M3. A Priority service tier (1.5x price) buys priority admission for faster responses and fewer failures under load. For self-hosters, the SGLang project publishes reference serving numbers on a 2,048-in / 256-out random workload at concurrency 64. On 8x B200 with MXFP8 weights it measured 1.58 s mean time to first token, 24.1 ms per output token and 2,385 tokens per second per GPU. On 8x H200 with BF16 weights it measured 1.05 s, 70.8 ms and 1,044 tokens per second per GPU. Thinking adds latency: on the OpenAI-compatible endpoint it is on unless disabled, so interactive apps should set thinking to disabled where reasoning isn't needed. The Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench run also shows M3 as one of the most persistent agents on that board, averaging 314 steps and about 90 minutes per task.

Pricing analysis

Surface Cost Notes
API input (request up to 512K input tokens) $0.30 / 1M tok MiniMax shows this as a permanent 50% off a $0.60 list price
API output (up to 512K input) $1.20 / 1M tok list $2.40; thinking tokens count as output
Cached input (up to 512K input) $0.06 / 1M tok automatic caching, no configuration; list $0.12
Requests above 512K input tokens $0.60 / $2.40 / $0.12 cached list $1.20 / $4.80 / $0.24; cache-hit tokens count toward the 512K threshold
Priority tier 1.5x standard $0.45 / $1.80 / $0.09 up to 512K; $0.90 / $3.60 / $0.18 above
Batch not offered no batch tier on the pay-as-you-go price list
Web search server tool $0.01 / request beta
Token Plan subscription $22 / $55 / $132 per month Plus / Max / Ultra quota plans covering M3 in coding tools
Rate limits 200 RPM / 10M TPM default account tier
Open weights free download MiniMax Community License conditions apply

The price tier follows the size of each request's input. A request with 400K input tokens bills at $0.30 per 1M, while a 600K-token request bills at $0.60 per 1M, so its input costs $0.36 instead of $0.18. Workloads that routinely fill the window should budget for the higher tier. MiniMax's own prompt-caching page still works its example at the $0.60 list rate; the pay-as-you-go price list is the billing reference.

Deployment & access

MiniMax API. The recommended path is the Anthropic-compatible endpoint (https://api.minimax.io/anthropic), which supports thinking blocks and interleaved thinking. OpenAI-compatible Chat Completions (https://api.minimax.io/v1) and an OpenAI Responses-compatible endpoint are also available. Images (up to 10 MB) and video (MP4, AVI, MOV or MKV, up to 50 MB inline or 512 MB through the Files API) go in as content blocks. The Anthropic endpoint ignores stop_sequences and top_k.

Third-party hosts. OpenRouter lists 13 providers, including Together, DeepInfra, Novita, Parasail, SambaNova and CoreWeave. They serve FP8 or FP4 weights, and max output ranges from 65,536 to 1,048,576 tokens depending on the host.

Self-hosting. BF16 weights (about 854 GB) and an official MXFP8 checkpoint (about 444 GB) are on Hugging Face and ModelScope, with recipes for SGLang, vLLM, Transformers, KTransformers, unsloth and AMD's ATOM (MXFP4/MXFP8). MiniMax's own self-hosting guide labels M3 support "Experimental" as of its 2026-08-26 review, still delivered through an SGLang development image. The reference configuration is 8x B200 with MXFP8 weights. SGLang also validates 4x B300 or GB300 (MXFP8), 8x H200 (BF16) and AMD MI355X/MI300X for text. SGLang reports validation only from 1K to 128K input tokens, and video serving is not validated in that recipe. Peak GPU memory is not published, so min_gpu_vram_gb stays null.

License. Self-hosting is where the license bites. The MiniMax Community License grants rights to use, copy, modify and distribute the weights "for non-commercial purposes". Any commercial use, including products built on derivatives, has three conditions:

  • The product must prominently display "Built with MiniMax M3" on a related website, user interface, blog post, about page or product documentation.
  • Products or services with more than US$20 million in yearly revenue need separate prior written authorization from MiniMax (api@minimax.io, subject "M3 licensing - authorization request").
  • Everyone else must send MiniMax a one-time notice (subject "M3 licensing — notice").

"Commercial Use" is defined broadly. It covers paid products that rely on the model, commercial use of APIs serving the model, and commercial deployment of fine-tuned or otherwise modified versions. Counsel should confirm whether that reaches a product built on MiniMax's own API or on a third-party host's M3 endpoint. An appendix also prohibits, among other things, any military purpose. This is materially tighter than the licenses of the peers named below, all of which grant commercial use up front and add conditions only at scale.

Safety & privacy

MiniMax publishes no safety framework, system card or refusal-calibration data for M3, and lists no compliance certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA) for the API. The first-party API runs sensitive-content detection on every request. Responses carry input_sensitive and output_sensitive flags with a category code (pornography, violence or terrorism, abuse, prohibited content and others), and a severe input violation returns an empty reply. The API privacy policy (effective 2026-03-30) names Nanonoble Pte. Ltd. in Singapore as the operator. It says personal data is stored in a US data center and processed under GDPR-style safeguards, with jurisdiction-specific rights for the EEA, UK and several US states. It lists "messages and content" among data used to analyze and improve the services, and it does not describe an opt-out for model training on API inputs, so trains_on_inputs stays null. Self-hosting removes the data-flow question but not the license's prohibited-use list, which bars military use, harm to minors and harmful disinformation.

Ecosystem & tooling

MiniMax serves M3 through Anthropic-compatible, OpenAI-compatible and Responses-compatible APIs, and documents the Anthropic SDK, OpenAI SDK and Vercel AI SDK in Python and TypeScript. That makes it a drop-in backend for Claude Code, Cursor and other tools that accept custom endpoints, packaged commercially as the Token Plan ($22 to $132 a month). MiniMax's own MiniMax Code agent platform runs on M3. Self-hosting has day-one recipes for SGLang, vLLM, Transformers, KTransformers, unsloth and AMD ATOM, plus an official MXFP8 checkpoint and ModelScope mirrors. Adoption is growing. The Hugging Face repo shows about 165,000 downloads in the last month and 1,500 likes, 13 providers serve it on OpenRouter, and LMArena has collected more than 48,000 votes on it. It is still smaller than the GLM and Kimi communities.

Buyer questions

Can I use MiniMax M3 commercially?

Only under conditions. The weights license grants rights for non-commercial purposes, and any commercial use requires prominently displaying "Built with MiniMax M3" plus a one-time notice to api@minimax.io. If the product or service earns more than US$20M a year, you need MiniMax's separate prior written authorization first. Have counsel review the license, including its broad definition of Commercial Use (which names commercial use of APIs serving the model) and its prohibited-use appendix.

What does it cost on the API?

$0.30 per 1M input tokens, $1.20 per 1M output tokens and $0.06 per 1M cached input tokens for requests up to 512K input tokens. Above 512K input the rates double to $0.60 / $2.40 / $0.12, with cache hits counting toward the threshold. MiniMax presents these as a permanent 50% discount off a $0.60 / $2.40 list price; Priority admission costs 1.5x, and there is no batch tier.

Does it really handle 1M tokens?

The model and API accept up to 1,000,000 tokens, but MiniMax guarantees only a minimum of 512K on the API. Requests past 512K bill at the higher tier, and self-hosted SGLang deployments are validated only to 128K input. Test your real lengths before relying on the full window.

Can it read images and video?

Yes, natively. The API accepts JPEG, PNG, GIF and WEBP images up to 10 MB, and MP4, AVI, MOV or MKV video up to 50 MB inline or 512 MB through the Files API, on both the Anthropic- and OpenAI-compatible endpoints.

How hard is it to self-host?

It is server-class only. MiniMax's reference is 8x B200 with the roughly 444 GB MXFP8 checkpoint; 4x B300, 8x H200 in BF16 and some AMD MI300-series setups are also validated. MiniMax labels the path experimental, and the license conditions still apply to any commercial deployment.

Can I get guaranteed JSON output?

Not natively. M3 supports tool calling, but MiniMax's response_format JSON-schema mode works only with MiniMax-Text-01. Enforce structure through tool definitions and validate responses in your own code.

Where is my data processed?

The international API is operated by Nanonoble Pte. Ltd. in Singapore, and its privacy policy stores personal data in a US data center. There are no published compliance certifications or a documented training opt-out, so regulated workloads should self-host or use a host with its own certifications, within the license terms.

How does it compare with GLM-5.3 and DeepSeek V4-Pro?

It is cheaper than both and adds image and video input they lack, and it scores higher on the independent Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench than DeepSeek V4-Pro. Both rivals rank higher on LMArena, have far more permissive licenses and are text-only.

Comparable models

GLM-5.3 — Z.ai

The text-only open flagship (Z.ai, $1.40 / $4.40, 1M context). It beats M3 on general quality (LMArena 1483 vs 1441) and license freedom: GLM-5.3's MIT-style license only adds a security review for Model-as-a-Service operators above US$10B revenue. M3 wins on price (about a quarter of the rate card) and on native image and video input.

Kimi K3 — Moonshot

The heavyweight multimodal open flagship (about 2.8T parameters, 1M context). It leads M3 on LMArena (1485) and grants commercial use by default, with conditions only for large Model-as-a-Service operators and very large products. It costs $3 / $15, ten times M3's input rate and 12.5 times its output rate.

Qwen3.8-Max — Alibaba

Alibaba's open-weights Max model: text, image and video input, 1M context, native structured outputs and web search on Model Studio. It offers a broader managed-cloud feature set and a license that restricts only Model-as-a-Service or AI-work-assistant businesses above US$50M. It costs $2 / $6, roughly 5-7 times M3.

DeepSeek V4-Pro — DeepSeek

The MIT-licensed text-only rival (current DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 version, 1M context, 384K output). It has the cleanest license and a higher LMArena score (1463), and off-peak pricing ($0.66 / $1.98, cache hits $0.022) comes closest to M3's economics. It trails M3 on the independent Long-Horizon Terminal-Bench (30.7 vs 38.5) and has no vision.

Sources

Primary references used to verify this review.

Model specs

Input price
$0.30 / Mtok
Output price
$1.20 / Mtok
Cached input
$0.06 / Mtok
Batch (in/out)
—
Context window
1M tokens
Max output
524K tokens
Knowledge cutoff
Undisclosed
Released
2026-06-01
Modalities
text, image, video → text
Output speed
Not profiled
License
Open weights (custom-minimax-community)
Clouds
First-party API

Last verified 2026-09-21