STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD

All comparisons ↗

MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs MISSINGNO.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads MISSINGNO. by 7.2 points on StealthMark, 45.9 to 38.7. It leads on 6 of the 7 benchmarks with results for both and MISSINGNO. on 1. MiniMax M3.1 Flash scores higher on Newton's Mirror, with its largest category advantage in reflections.

See the difference ↘
All results ↗
Model guide ↗

Overall StealthMark

45.9/100Overall rank 24/53
38.7/100Overall rank 36/53

General Intelligence

35.8/100
35.3/100

Visual Intelligence

62.6/100
42.4/100

Reasoning efficiency

On every task, result quality and reasoning tokens are each compared with all measured models and weighed equally. Each dot is one model.

Single-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens on a single problem

Multi-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens across connected steps, as in agentic workflows

  • MISSINGNO.Multi-step reasoning not measured

Open or local

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • MiniMax M3.1 Flash
  • MISSINGNO.
  • Other models
  • Median

DATASHEET

Specs and pricing

  • MiniMax M3.1 Flash
  • MISSINGNO.
  • Other models
  • Median
Context windowTokens per request, max output below
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: 1MMISSINGNO.: Not published
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: Not measuredMISSINGNO.: 846tokens/s
SizeTotal and active parameters
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: 428B23B activeMISSINGNO.: Not disclosed
Developer
MiniMaxNot published
Input → output
Text, image, video → textNot published
Architecture
Mixture-of-Experts with MiniMax Sparse Attention and native multimodal encoderNot published

Full datasheets, every price and sourceMiniMax M3.1 Flash ↗

Anticipating threats and planning ahead. Collect coins while avoiding ghosts. Ghosts move before the player each turn, and collisions cost a life. 3 levels in sequence, up to 66 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash 30.7/100Rank 28/47

Survived 1 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 39 ptsTurn 20 / 20

Points per level

LevelMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
Level 1Second Thoughts
6 ptsOut of lives
No run
Level 2Pressure Pot
5 ptsOut of lives
No run
Level 3Hide or Flight
9 ptsSurvived
No run

Cooperative planning and learning from experience. Coordinate two robots to push numbered cores onto matching sockets. Pressure plates hold doors open; moving either robot uses one turn. 5 levels in sequence, up to 152 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

MiniMax M3.1 Flash 21.9/100Rank 38/48

Cleared 2 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 517.2 ptsTurn 24 / 40

Points per level

LevelMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
Level 1Hold the door
5.2 ptsCleared
No run
Level 2Crossfeed
8.6 ptsClearedFinished early · 1 beacon left
No run
Level 3Relay vault
5 ptsOut of turns
No run
Level 4Passing bay
4.4 ptsFinished early
No run
Level 5Second thoughts
17.2 ptsFinished early
No run

Newton's Mirror

Same task instructions

Physics, perspective and recursive reflections, tested together. Explore the test ↗

The judgment

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

The sphere placement, separate airborne black blob, recent cyan contact and elongated crimson aftermath support the required gross physical state. The reflection system remains severely incomplete: isolated side images, broad metallic bands and sparse light patches replace extensive mirror repetitions and curved nested imagery.

MISSINGNO.

The centered sphere, separate airborne black blob and cyan-above-crimson ordering provide limited valid structure. The colored beads do not establish the required impact and transport histories. One dim floor image supports a small part of the optical system, while the defining wall repetitions, nested sphere imagery and emitter mappings are missing. Rounded volume and some gloss earn material credit, tempered by soft surface appearance and excessive paint-bead scale.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
State at 600 ms20.0/2519.0/25
Camera and placement10.0/157.0/15
Reflections24.0/12012.0/120
Materials and scale8.0/105.5/10
Floor-damage reward0.0/100.0/10

Benchmark task

A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.

Selfie

Different task instructions

Visual construction and creative interpretation.

The judgment

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

The sculptural M, confident grin and miniature theatrical pose closely fulfill the brief. Controlled gradients and clean shapes give the character volume and appeal. Moderate drawing complexity, an apparently separated shoe and ambiguous grounding limit the finish.

MISSINGNO.

An appealing purple character with a readable pleased expression and raised-moustache joke. Smooth shading and clean contours support the simple design, but indistinct mitten grips, minimally textured curls and an uncompressed strap weaken the requested physical interaction. The jelly suggests gloss more convincingly than translucency.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness7.5/105.5/10
Anatomy & construction6.0/104.5/10
Space & placement7.0/106.0/10
Light & reflections6.0/105.5/10
Purposeful detail5.0/104.5/10
Artistry & character6.0/104.5/10
Materials & effects7.0/104.0/10
Visual integrity6.0/106.0/10

Benchmark task

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

A small robot with an oversized angular head presents a glowing object. The scene tests character proportions, gesture and contrasting materials.

MISSINGNO.

A glossy purple jelly struggles with an oversized fake moustache at a playful checkpoint. The scene tests comic expression, physical contact and the appearance of a soft translucent body.

Mona Lisa

Same task instructions

Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.

The judgment

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

A coherent decorative portrait combines layered hair, garment contours, linked trim and atmospheric scenery. These provide meaningful drawing complexity, but likeness remains limited by the frontal elongated face and altered clothing. Compressed hands, abrupt facial shading and cluttered local edges leave the portrait uneven.

MISSINGNO.

Clean contours, connected body forms and gentle gradients support a basic, coherent portrait. Likeness remains weak: the face dominates the body, the seated angle is lost, and crossed hands become dark lobes without traceable wrists or fingers. Readable facial details add some drawing complexity, but clothing, landscape and material treatment remain sparse.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness4.0/101.5/10
Anatomy & construction4.5/102.5/10
Space & placement5.5/102.5/10
Light & reflections4.5/103.0/10
Purposeful detail5.5/102.0/10
Artistry & character6.0/103.5/10
Materials & effects5.5/102.0/10
Visual integrity5.5/106.0/10

Benchmark task

An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.

Beach

Same task instructions

Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.

The judgment

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

A controlled, detailed beach illustration with expressive animals, coherent depth and accomplished foliage and accessory drawing. Its warm palette and varied contours sustain visual interest. Simplified anatomy and object volumes limit physical conviction, while reflection streaks crossing dry-looking sand and generic shadows weaken the lighting.

MISSINGNO.

A coherent sunset beach with clear requested subjects, balanced framing and clean shapes. The aligned solar reflection and warm gradients establish atmosphere. Primitive animal construction, ambiguous furniture, sparse depth cues and minimally developed surfaces limit its drawing complexity and physical richness.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness8.5/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction7.0/104.0/10
Space & placement7.5/106.5/10
Light & reflections6.0/105.0/10
Purposeful detail8.0/103.0/10
Artistry & character6.5/103.0/10
Materials & effects6.5/105.0/10
Visual integrity7.5/103.5/10

Benchmark task

A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.

Ground Truth

Same task instructions

Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.

The judgment

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

MISSINGNO.

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

Benchmark task

A plank, computer mouse and blueberry in a steel room test physical stability, spatial relationships, materials and lighting.

Raccoon

Same task instructions

Scene composition and interacting subjects.

The judgment

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

An expressive, coherent cartoon clearly demonstrates the requested riding and steering relationship. Layered animal shapes, readable vehicle depth and purposeful facial details support its drawing quality. Ambiguous grips, sparse cast shadows and simplified material responses limit physical precision.

MISSINGNO.

The requested interaction reads clearly through recognizable animals, expressive faces and a coherent hull-water relationship. Clean curves and readable accessories give the cartoon polish. Partly unresolved grips and supporting contacts limit physical construction; modest shape complexity, weak directional lighting and schematic water constrain its finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness9.0/108.0/10
Anatomy & construction8.0/104.5/10
Space & placement8.0/105.5/10
Light & reflections6.0/105.0/10
Purposeful detail7.5/106.0/10
Artistry & character7.5/105.0/10
Materials & effects7.0/104.5/10
Visual integrity8.0/107.0/10

Benchmark task

A jet-ski scene pairs a canine driver with a raccoon passenger. It tests the placement and contact of interacting subjects, along with vehicle construction.

Pelican

Same task instructions

Subject construction and spatial relationships.

The judgment

MiniMax M3.1 Flash

A controlled coastal illustration with a clear pelican silhouette, detailed wheels and accomplished feather and bill drawing. Continuous body construction and grounded wheels support the scene. Ambiguous leg, pedal and steering contacts weaken the riding mechanics; approximate directional lighting and simplified materials limit physical conviction.

MISSINGNO.

A coherent, cheerful illustration with recognizable pelican features, balanced composition, clean contours and useful small details. Its controlled curves and layered wheels demonstrate competent drawing skill. Ambiguous pedal and steering contacts, sparse drivetrain construction and weak directional lighting limit the riding mechanics and finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashMISSINGNO.
Task & likeness8.5/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction6.5/105.5/10
Space & placement8.0/106.0/10
Light & reflections7.0/105.0/10
Purposeful detail7.5/105.5/10
Artistry & character6.5/106.0/10
Materials & effects7.0/104.5/10
Visual integrity6.5/106.5/10

Benchmark task

A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.