DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 rates 111 points higher; the data cannot separate them.
Rating
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017897±51
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash786±112
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 rates 111 points higher; the data cannot separate them.
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | MiniMax M3.1 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Leaderboard rank | 21 of 22 | 22 of 22 |
| Win rate | 18.7% | 10.5% |
| Completion | 97.0% | 93.9% |
| Speed | 0.9 min | 2.6 min |
| Recovery | 89.5%76–96%, n = 38 | 90.0%60–98%, n = 10 |
| Cost per completion | $0.123 | $0.149 |
| Phone rank | 16 of 20 | 20 of 20 |
Under Recovery, its 95% interval and n, in failed actions. Last updated .
In eligible head-to-head comparisons, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has a 66.7% decisive win rate and MiniMax M3.1 Flash has 0.0%. 33.3% end without a decisive preference. This matchup is provisional; the evidence is limited.
No. Completion for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and MiniMax M3.1 Flash records whether the agent reported finishing. Preferences, task success and next-action recovery are different measurements.
Read speed and estimated cost alongside completion and preference. An early failure can be fast. Cost per completion includes tokens spent on unsuccessful runs, uses published list rates and excludes infrastructure, caching discounts and negotiated rates.
Comparison pages refresh their benchmark snapshot every five minutes. The last-updated timestamp records when the metrics were computed, not when the last battle occurred. Model rank may move between snapshots.