Claude Haiku 5.5 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Anthropic · US | MiniMax · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 for 5x the context window of haiku 4.5 (1m vs 200k tokens) and double the max output (128k vs 64k) or first haiku-class model with an adjustable 'effort' setting to trade off cost, latency, and intelligence. Pick MiniMax M3.1 Flash for $0.15/$0.60 per million tokens (cached $0.015) with flat pricing regardless of prompt length or 428b-parameter moe (about 23b active) with weights on hugging face from october 23, 2026. Choose MiniMax M3.1 Flash if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Haiku 5.5 if you want a managed API.
Claude Haiku 5.5 (Anthropic, US) and MiniMax M3.1 Flash (MiniMax, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Claude Haiku 5.5 is anthropic's October 7, 2026 small-model refresh — a 1M-token context window (up from 200K) at roughly 75% lower average cost than Haiku 4.5, priced at $0.10/$0.50 per million tokens. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is miniMax's October 19, 2026 always-thinking agentic Flash model - 1M context, text/image/video input, $0.15/$0.60 and open weights under a community license. They diverge most on price and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Claude Haiku 5.5 is about 1.5× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens vs $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens) — modest, but it adds up at steady volume.
- ▸Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
- ▸Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Claude Haiku 5.5 | MiniMax M3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic (US) | MiniMax (China) |
| Released | October 7, 2026 | October 19, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens | $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | Yes — self-hostable |
| Modalities | text, image, code | text, image, video, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | Not published |
Who wins what
5x the context window of Haiku 4.5 (1M vs 200K tokens) and double the max output (128K vs 64K)
Claude Haiku 5.5
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is comparatively weak here — thinking is always on and default effort is max, which inflates output-token cost
First Haiku-class model with an adjustable 'effort' setting to trade off cost, latency, and intelligence
Claude Haiku 5.5
At $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens it undercuts MiniMax M3.1 Flash ($0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Anthropic's cheapest small model yet — runs about 75% cheaper on average than Haiku 4.5
Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic's October 7, 2026 small-model refresh — a 1M-token context window (up from 200K) at roughly 75% lower average cost than Haiku 4.5, priced at $0.10/$0.50 per million tokens — and it runs cheaper at $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens.
$0.15/$0.60 per million tokens (cached $0.015) with flat pricing regardless of prompt length
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Claude Haiku 5.5 is comparatively weak here — pricing jumps roughly 5x beyond 100K-token prompts ($0.50/$2.50 per million vs the headline $0.10/$0.50)
428B-parameter MoE (about 23B active) with weights on Hugging Face from October 23, 2026
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax's October 19, 2026 always-thinking agentic Flash model - 1M context, text/image/video input, $0.15/$0.60 and open weights under a community license — and its weights are open while Claude Haiku 5.5 is API-only.
DeepSWE v1.1 of 73.7% and OSWorld V2 of 61.7 (MiniMax-reported)
MiniMax M3.1 Flash
MiniMax's October 19, 2026 always-thinking agentic Flash model - 1M context, text/image/video input, $0.15/$0.60 and open weights under a community license — and it is the newer of the two.
Lowest cost at scale
Claude Haiku 5.5
At $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Claude Haiku 5.5
At $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens it undercuts MiniMax M3.1 Flash, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Haiku 5.5 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is 5x the context window of haiku 4.5 (1m vs 200k tokens) and double the max output (128k vs 64k)
→ Claude Haiku 5.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is $0.15/$0.60 per million tokens (cached $0.015) with flat pricing regardless of prompt length
→ MiniMax M3.1 Flash
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Claude Haiku 5.5 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
Claude Haiku 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's October 7, 2026 small-model refresh — a 1M-token context window (up from 200K) at roughly 75% lower average cost than Haiku 4.5, priced at $0.10/$0.50 per million tokens. Released October 7, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for 5x the context window of Haiku 4.5 (1M vs 200K tokens) and double the max output (128K vs 64K), first Haiku-class model with an adjustable 'effort' setting to trade off cost, latency, and intelligence, anthropic's cheapest small model yet — runs about 75% cheaper on average than Haiku 4.5, and over-refuses benign requests only 0.17% of the time on the API, down from Haiku 4.5's 0.44%.
Its trade-offs are real: pricing jumps roughly 5x beyond 100K-token prompts ($0.50/$2.50 per million vs the headline $0.10/$0.50), extended thinking can no longer be fully disabled — only dialed between low, medium, and high effort, and as the smallest tier, trails both Sonnet 5.5 and Opus 5.5 on hard reasoning and open-ended work. At $0.1 in / $0.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
MiniMax M3.1 Flash: where it fits
MiniMax's October 19, 2026 always-thinking agentic Flash model - 1M context, text/image/video input, $0.15/$0.60 and open weights under a community license. Released October 19, 2026 by MiniMax, it is built for $0.15/$0.60 per million tokens (cached $0.015) with flat pricing regardless of prompt length, 428B-parameter MoE (about 23B active) with weights on Hugging Face from October 23, 2026, deepSWE v1.1 of 73.7% and OSWorld V2 of 61.7 (MiniMax-reported), and artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 42, 13 points above MiniMax M3.
Its trade-offs: thinking is always on and default effort is max, which inflates output-token cost, behind DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 on Artificial Analysis's independent index, custom MiniMax Community license: attribution required, and products above $20M annual revenue need written authorization, and benchmarks are mostly self-reported; no SWE-bench Verified figure published. At $0.15 in / $0.6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. MiniMax M3.1 Flash gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Haiku 5.5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Claude Haiku 5.5 and MiniMax M3.1 Flash without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Claude Haiku 5.5 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Haiku 5.5 leans toward 5x the context window of haiku 4.5 (1m vs 200k tokens) and double the max output (128k vs 64k) while MiniMax M3.1 Flash leans toward $0.15/$0.60 per million tokens (cached $0.015) with flat pricing regardless of prompt length, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Haiku 5.5 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Haiku 5.5 is API-metered at $0.1/$0.5 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Haiku 5.5 and MiniMax M3.1 Flash together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Haiku 5.5, MiniMax M3.1 Flash and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Haiku 5.5 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash — released October 19, 2026, about 12 days after Claude Haiku 5.5.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.