MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B: The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, MiniMax-M2.1 emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, Step3 VL 10B remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B 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-M2.1

Other

Reasoning: 8
Coding: 3
Multimodal: 3
Long Context: 5
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.001
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 67.338tokens/sec

Step3 VL 10B

Other

Reasoning: 6
Coding: 1
Multimodal: 1
Long Context: 2
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.015
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: —

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `MiniMax-M2.1` vs `Step3 VL 10B`.

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-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B debate, MiniMax-M2.1 scores 80 against Step3 VL 10B's 60. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B 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-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

MiniMax-M2.1300ms

Step3 VL 10B300ms

Tokens per Second

MiniMax-M2.167.338

Step3 VL 10B29

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B

Power is only one part of the equation. This MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B 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-M2.1 would cost $0.001, whereas Step3 VL 10B would cost $0.018. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B Battle for You?

Choose MiniMax-M2.1 if...

Your top priority is raw performance and capability.

You are working in a technical or scientific field requiring the highest accuracy.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Choose Step3 VL 10B if...

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

You prioritize cost-effectiveness over maximum performance.

Your workload requires consistent, reliable performance.

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

Your Questions about the MiniMax-M2.1 vs Step3 VL 10B Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/