Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
aka Sonnet 5.5 vs M3.1-Flash
- CheaperClaude Sonnet 5.51/1 postsmedian gap ~1.7×
- FasterClaude Sonnet 5.51/1 postsmedian gap ~12×
As stated in each post, not a controlled benchmark.
Posts
2
Same prompt, separate runs
8Not a controlled comparison: prompts, tools and time differ.
Rocket launch in Three.js
About this matchup
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash in real side-by-side tests: 2 posts from X where both got the same prompt, with cost or time from every post. Judge coding ability from the actual outputs.
Sonnet 5.5 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash: which is better for coding?
Which is better for coding, Sonnet 5.5 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
None of the 2 posts here names one of the two as the better result, so judge the outputs above for the work you care about.
Which is cheaper, Sonnet 5.5 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
1 post states a cost for both: Claude Sonnet 5.5 was cheaper in it (~1.7× cheaper). These are the costs the posts state for each run, not list prices.
Which is faster, Sonnet 5.5 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
1 post states a time for both: Claude Sonnet 5.5 was faster in it (~12× faster). Times are as stated in each post; tools and settings differ between posts.
Summary
Claude Sonnet 5.5 and MiniMax M3.1 Flash appear together in 2 posts on X: marble run machine, pass or fail (@wikiwayne) and procedural ocean with a sailboat, blind test of 3 models (@TheINAOG). All are part of larger lineups with other models. In @TheINAOG's procedural ocean with a sailboat, blind test of 3 models, Claude Sonnet 5.5 was cheaper ($0.25 vs $0.42) and faster (6 min vs 1 h 12 min), as reported in the post.
What each post reports
| Post | Model | Time | Cost | Tokens | Author’s verdict | Post |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marble run machine, pass or fail@wikiwayne | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | — | — | — | Muse Wonder 1.0 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 pass; DeepSeek and MiniMax fail on their second attempts. | X post |
| Marble run machine, pass or fail@wikiwayne | MiniMax M3.1 Flash | 3.4 min | $0.059 | — | — | X post |
| Procedural ocean with a sailboat, blind test of 3 models@TheINAOG | MiniMax M3.1 Flash | 1 h 12 min | $0.42 | — | — | X post |
| Procedural ocean with a sailboat, blind test of 3 models@TheINAOG | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 6 min | $0.25 | — | — | X post |
Only numbers stated in each post. “—” means the post doesn’t say.
Quick facts
| Model | Vendor | Released | Input $/1M tokens | Output $/1M tokens | Context (tokens) | Official links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Anthropic | 2026-09-28 | $2 | $10 | 1,000,000 | Model docs |
| MiniMax M3.1 Flash | MiniMax | 2026-09-27 | 1,000,000 | Model docs |
From the vendors’ official pages, checked 2026-10-19. Standard API list prices; each value links its source and a blank cell could not be verified. The archive’s own numbers above are what each post states.
Who won where
1- Marble run machine, pass or failMuse Wonder 1.0 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 pass; DeepSeek and MiniMax fail on their second attempts.— the author’s view, @wikiwayne (paraphrased)
Models
Related matchups
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash91 posts · 115.3K viewsClaude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.560 posts · 445.7K viewsClaude Opus 5.5 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash37 posts · 20.6K viewsClaude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol27 posts · 250.2K viewsClaude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Terra21 posts · 39.6K viewsClaude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra18 posts · 356.9K views