MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning): The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, MiniMax M1 40k remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) comparison will break down every critical metric to help you make the best decision.

Explore best-for scenarios•Let the AI Selector recommend next steps

Model Snapshot

Key decision metrics at a glance.

MiniMax M1 40k

Other

Reasoning: 1
Coding: 1
Multimodal: 2
Long Context: 3
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.015
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: —

Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)

Other

Reasoning: 7
Coding: 1
Multimodal: 1
Long Context: 2
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.003
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 87.936tokens/sec

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `MiniMax M1 40k` vs `Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) debate, MiniMax M1 40k scores 10 against Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)'s 70. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

MiniMax M1 40k300ms

Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)300ms

Tokens per Second

MiniMax M1 40k41

Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)87.936

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)

Power is only one part of the equation. This MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, MiniMax M1 40k would cost $0.018, whereas Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) would cost $0.003. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) Battle for You?

Choose MiniMax M1 40k if...

Cost is a secondary concern to power in your MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) decision.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Your use case demands cutting-edge AI performance.

Choose Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) if...

You need a highly responsive model for user-facing applications.

Your budget is a primary consideration in the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) choice.

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the MiniMax M1 40k vs Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/