STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD

All comparisons ↗

MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs LongCat-2.0

MiniMax M3.1 Flash leads LongCat-2.0 by 20.4 points on StealthMark, 45.9 to 25.5. It leads on 6 of the 7 benchmarks with results for both and LongCat-2.0 on 1. MiniMax M3.1 Flash scores higher on Mona Lisa, with its largest category advantage in artistry & character.

See the difference ↘
All results ↗
Model guide ↗

Overall StealthMark

45.9/100Overall rank 24/53
25.5/100Overall rank 45/53

General Intelligence

35.8/100
17.2/100

Visual Intelligence

62.6/100
34.4/100

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

  • LongCat-2.0Multi-step reasoning not measured

Open or local

Open modelMIT

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • MiniMax M3.1 Flash
  • LongCat-2.0
  • Other models
  • Median

DATASHEET

Specs and pricing

Both take about 1M tokens of context.

  • MiniMax M3.1 Flash
  • LongCat-2.0
  • Other models
  • Median
PricePer 1M output tokens, input below
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: No list priceLongCat-2.0: $1.20$0.30 input
Context windowTokens per request, max output below
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: 1MTiedLongCat-2.0: 1MTied
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: Not measuredLongCat-2.0: 86tokens/s
SizeTotal and active parameters
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: 428B23B activeLongCat-2.0: Not disclosed
Developer
MiniMaxMeituan
Origin
Not publishedChina
Input → output
Text, image, video → textText → text
Architecture
Mixture-of-Experts with MiniMax Sparse Attention and native multimodal encoderMixture-of-Experts with LongCat Sparse Attention

Full datasheets, every price and sourceMiniMax M3.1 Flash ↗LongCat-2.0 ↗

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 FlashLongCat-2.0
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 FlashLongCat-2.0
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.

LongCat-2.0

Cyan lies on the sphere's facing middle rather than showing its recent interaction near the apex. Separate airborne black and elongated crimson support part of the timing sequence. Small side images and an overlapping lower image provide limited reflection ordering, but recursive room structure, nested imagery and emitter mappings are largely absent. The main sphere is smaller and higher in the frame than prescribed, and the surfaces have a soft, matte appearance.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashLongCat-2.0
State at 600 ms20.0/259.5/25
Camera and placement10.0/156.5/15
Reflections24.0/12012.5/120
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.

LongCat-2.0

Amber slit eyes, a pointed beak, cream feathers and gold-trimmed black clothing establish the secretive owl rogue. The head appears frontal rather than lowered, with much of the face exposed. The centered silhouette is effective, but stiff cloak geometry, shallow facial modeling and extremely dark clothing limit depth and finish. Sparse gold markings suggest the requested circuitry only loosely.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashLongCat-2.0
Task & likeness7.5/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction6.0/106.0/10
Space & placement7.0/106.0/10
Light & reflections6.0/105.5/10
Purposeful detail5.0/106.0/10
Artistry & character6.0/106.5/10
Materials & effects7.0/105.5/10
Visual integrity6.0/106.5/10

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.

LongCat-2.0

A cloaked owl with luminous eyes tests expression, fabric folds and the separation of dark forms.

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.

LongCat-2.0

The centered portrait, slight smile, overlapping hands and distant landscape suggest Mona Lisa, but replication is weak. The face has little volume, the shoulders and torso form a narrow wedge, and the hands are fingerless ovals with unresolved wrists. Broad gray background bands provide limited depth. A bright head rim and pale hands contrast with an almost featureless dark figure.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashLongCat-2.0
Task & likeness4.0/100.5/10
Anatomy & construction4.5/100.5/10
Space & placement5.5/100.5/10
Light & reflections4.5/100.5/10
Purposeful detail5.5/100.0/10
Artistry & character6.0/100.5/10
Materials & effects5.5/100.0/10
Visual integrity5.5/100.5/10

Benchmark task

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

Beach

Different 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.

LongCat-2.0

The sunset, palms, birds and beach animals create a cheerful, readable scene. Clean silhouettes and a vivid sky establish the composition, but construction remains schematic. The right palm appears rooted in open water, shadows have limited connection to the sunset, and the sun’s reflection consists of rigid bands. Small creatures and beach equipment are recognizable but minimally developed.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashLongCat-2.0
Task & likeness8.5/107.5/10
Anatomy & construction7.0/105.5/10
Space & placement7.5/105.5/10
Light & reflections6.0/106.0/10
Purposeful detail8.0/105.0/10
Artistry & character6.5/105.0/10
Materials & effects6.5/103.0/10
Visual integrity7.5/104.0/10

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.

LongCat-2.0

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.

LongCat-2.0

The raccoon is recognizable and expressive, with a clear mask and striped tail. The dog's anatomy is poorly resolved, and the flattened craft lacks convincing steering and seating. Feet extend below the hull, weakening the sense of support. An appealing palette, clean shapes and decorative water effects give the illustration some polish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashLongCat-2.0
Task & likeness9.0/104.0/10
Anatomy & construction8.0/103.0/10
Space & placement8.0/104.5/10
Light & reflections6.0/105.5/10
Purposeful detail7.5/106.0/10
Artistry & character7.5/103.0/10
Materials & effects7.0/105.5/10
Visual integrity8.0/105.0/10

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

Different 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.

LongCat-2.0

A clearly recognizable pelican cycles through a well-composed coastal sunset. Warm colors, flowing scarf, feather contours and bicycle details give the illustration character. The legs connect to the body, but the farther foot's pedal contact and the wing's handlebar grip remain ambiguous. Clean vector shapes provide polish, with limited material texture and directional shading.

Score breakdown

CategoryMiniMax M3.1 FlashLongCat-2.0
Task & likeness8.5/108.5/10
Anatomy & construction6.5/107.0/10
Space & placement8.0/108.0/10
Light & reflections7.0/107.5/10
Purposeful detail7.5/108.0/10
Artistry & character6.5/108.5/10
Materials & effects7.0/107.0/10
Visual integrity6.5/108.5/10

Benchmark task

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