aivs.tv

AI Coding

Paper receipt and fabric under pressure, four models — MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 Flash

0:00 / 0:06
MiniMax M3.1 Flash (top left)
Posted bySakata@sakatayasha · on X
View post on X

32 likes908 views

Scoreboard4

  1. MiniMax M3.1 FlashMiniMax
    Author’s pick
    • Top left
  2. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeek
    • medium confidence
    • Top right
    • Written “DeepSeek V4.1 Flash” after the 1017 update shipped; read as V4.1 Flash 1017.
  3. Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic
    • Bottom left
  4. GLM 5.3 FlashZhipu AI (Z.ai)
    • Bottom right

Prompt

Topic · Interactive cloth simulation

Paper receipt and fabric under pressure, four modelsThe post doesn’t quote the prompt wording.

Author’s verdict
MiniMax M3.1 Flash did best: the receipt kept its shape and legible text. DeepSeek got sharp folds in motion, Opus’s paper was too soft, GLM’s too rigid.

@sakatayasha’s view (paraphrased)

MiniMax M3.1 Flash, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017, Claude Opus 5.5 and GLM 5.3 Flash get the same prompt to simulate paper and elastic fabric bending, wrinkling and deforming under pressure. Shown as a 2×2 grid.

The post, itemised

Kind
Side-by-side
Task
Paper receipt and fabric under pressure, four models
Topic
Interactive cloth simulation
Category
Simulations
Mode
Not stated
Posted
Video length
6 s
Likes
32
Views
908
Bookmarks
7
Sponsored
No

Related

Topic: Interactive cloth simulationMiniMax M3.1 FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Claude Opus 5.5GLM 5.3 FlashCompare all 4 modelsClaude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 FlashClaude Opus 5.5 vs MiniMax M3.1 FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3 FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs MiniMax M3.1 FlashGLM 5.3 Flash vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash

Posted by @sakatayasha on X. aivs.tv claims no ownership: it hosts a copy for fast playback and links to the post on X. Request removal

More with these models