Pick MAI-1-preview for microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on openai or ranked in the top 15 on lm arena at launch. Pick Step 3.7 Flash for a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows or scmp reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from deepseek and moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size. Choose Step 3.7 Flash if you need self-hosting or data privacy; MAI-1-preview if you want a managed API.
MAI-1-preview (Microsoft, US) and Step 3.7 Flash (StepFun, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. MAI-1-preview is microsoft's first fully in-house foundation model - a strategic break from sole reliance on OpenAI, trained on ~15,000 H100 GPUs. Step 3.7 Flash is stepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Cost model: Step 3.7 Flash ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while MAI-1-preview is API-metered at Not published. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
Context window: Step 3.7 Flash holds 2× more — 256K (~393 pages) vs 128K (~192 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Step 3.7 Flash is the newer model by about 9 months (released May 29, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
MAI-1-preview
Step 3.7 Flash
Provider
Microsoft (US)
StepFun (China)
Released
August 28, 2025
May 29, 2026
Context window
128K (~192 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
Not published
$0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on OpenAI: MAI-1-preview — MAI-1-preview lists microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on OpenAI among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
Ranked in the top 15 on LM Arena at launch: MAI-1-preview — MAI-1-preview lists ranked in the top 15 on LM Arena at launch among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
Trained on roughly 15,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs, a genuine internal infrastructure investment: MAI-1-preview — MAI-1-preview lists trained on roughly 15,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs, a genuine internal infrastructure investment among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
A 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows: Step 3.7 Flash — MAI-1-preview is comparatively weak here — a 'preview' release, not yet positioned as Microsoft's primary Copilot model
SCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size: Step 3.7 Flash — StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights — and it carries the larger 256K context.
Open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price: Step 3.7 Flash — Its 256K window holds about 2× more than MAI-1-preview's 128K in a single prompt.
Lowest cost at scale: MAI-1-preview — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Step 3.7 Flash's $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input: Step 3.7 Flash — Its 256K window is about 2× larger than MAI-1-preview's 128K, fitting roughly 393 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: MAI-1-preview — At Not published it undercuts Step 3.7 Flash, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Step 3.7 Flash — Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: Step 3.7 Flash — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; MAI-1-preview is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on openai: MAI-1-preview — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows: Step 3.7 Flash — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 Flash — Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
MAI-1-preview: where it fits
Microsoft's first fully in-house foundation model - a strategic break from sole reliance on OpenAI, trained on ~15,000 H100 GPUs. Released August 28, 2025 by Microsoft, it is built for microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on OpenAI, ranked in the top 15 on LM Arena at launch, trained on roughly 15,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs, a genuine internal infrastructure investment, and rolled into Copilot alongside OpenAI models, giving Microsoft a real second option.
Its trade-offs are real: a 'preview' release, not yet positioned as Microsoft's primary Copilot model, no public per-token API pricing - not sold as a standalone product, and distinct from Microsoft's later MAI-Thinking-1 reasoning model - an earlier, more general-purpose entry.
Step 3.7 Flash: where it fits
StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. Released May 29, 2026 by StepFun, it is built for a 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, sCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size, open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price, and includes a 1.8B vision encoder for image understanding alongside text.
Its trade-offs: stepFun is a newer, less established lab than DeepSeek, Alibaba, or Moonshot, benchmark 'outshines rivals' claims are from press coverage of specific tests, not a full independent leaderboard sweep, and smaller ecosystem and less third-party documentation than the more established Chinese labs. At $0.2 in / $1.15 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. Step 3.7 Flash gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. MAI-1-preview 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.
Frequently asked questions
Is MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 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, MAI-1-preview leans toward microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on openai while Step 3.7 Flash leans toward a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while MAI-1-preview is API-metered at Not published. 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?
Step 3.7 Flash — 256K vs 128K, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both MAI-1-preview and Step 3.7 Flash together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you MAI-1-preview, Step 3.7 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, MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash — released May 29, 2026, about 9 months after MAI-1-preview.
MAI-1-preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
Microsoft · US | StepFun · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick MAI-1-preview for microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on openai or ranked in the top 15 on lm arena at launch. Pick Step 3.7 Flash for a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows or scmp reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from deepseek and moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size. Choose Step 3.7 Flash if you need self-hosting or data privacy; MAI-1-preview if you want a managed API.
MAI-1-preview (Microsoft, US) and Step 3.7 Flash (StepFun, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. MAI-1-preview is microsoft's first fully in-house foundation model - a strategic break from sole reliance on OpenAI, trained on ~15,000 H100 GPUs. Step 3.7 Flash is stepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Cost model: Step 3.7 Flash ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while MAI-1-preview is API-metered at Not published. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
▸Context window: Step 3.7 Flash holds 2× more — 256K (~393 pages) vs 128K (~192 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Step 3.7 Flash is the newer model by about 9 months (released May 29, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸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
MAI-1-preview
Step 3.7 Flash
Provider
Microsoft (US)
StepFun (China)
Released
August 28, 2025
May 29, 2026
Context window
128K (~192 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
Not published
$0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on OpenAI
MAI-1-preview
MAI-1-preview lists microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on OpenAI among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
Ranked in the top 15 on LM Arena at launch
MAI-1-preview
MAI-1-preview lists ranked in the top 15 on LM Arena at launch among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
Trained on roughly 15,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs, a genuine internal infrastructure investment
MAI-1-preview
MAI-1-preview lists trained on roughly 15,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs, a genuine internal infrastructure investment among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
A 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows
Step 3.7 Flash
MAI-1-preview is comparatively weak here — a 'preview' release, not yet positioned as Microsoft's primary Copilot model
SCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights — and it carries the larger 256K context.
Open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price
Step 3.7 Flash
Its 256K window holds about 2× more than MAI-1-preview's 128K in a single prompt.
Lowest cost at scale
MAI-1-preview
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Step 3.7 Flash's $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
Step 3.7 Flash
Its 256K window is about 2× larger than MAI-1-preview's 128K, fitting roughly 393 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ MAI-1-preview
At Not published it undercuts Step 3.7 Flash, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Step 3.7 Flash
Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Step 3.7 Flash
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; MAI-1-preview is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on openai
→ MAI-1-preview
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows
→ Step 3.7 Flash
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 Flash
Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
MAI-1-preview: where it fits
Microsoft's first fully in-house foundation model - a strategic break from sole reliance on OpenAI, trained on ~15,000 H100 GPUs. Released August 28, 2025 by Microsoft, it is built for microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on OpenAI, ranked in the top 15 on LM Arena at launch, trained on roughly 15,000 NVIDIA H100 GPUs, a genuine internal infrastructure investment, and rolled into Copilot alongside OpenAI models, giving Microsoft a real second option.
Its trade-offs are real: a 'preview' release, not yet positioned as Microsoft's primary Copilot model, no public per-token API pricing - not sold as a standalone product, and distinct from Microsoft's later MAI-Thinking-1 reasoning model - an earlier, more general-purpose entry.
Step 3.7 Flash: where it fits
StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. Released May 29, 2026 by StepFun, it is built for a 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, sCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size, open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price, and includes a 1.8B vision encoder for image understanding alongside text.
Its trade-offs: stepFun is a newer, less established lab than DeepSeek, Alibaba, or Moonshot, benchmark 'outshines rivals' claims are from press coverage of specific tests, not a full independent leaderboard sweep, and smaller ecosystem and less third-party documentation than the more established Chinese labs. At $0.2 in / $1.15 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. Step 3.7 Flash gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. MAI-1-preview 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 MAI-1-preview and Step 3.7 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.
Is MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 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, MAI-1-preview leans toward microsoft's first fully in-house, end-to-end foundation model - a historic break from relying solely on openai while Step 3.7 Flash leans toward a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while MAI-1-preview is API-metered at Not published. 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?
Step 3.7 Flash — 256K vs 128K, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both MAI-1-preview and Step 3.7 Flash together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you MAI-1-preview, Step 3.7 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, MAI-1-preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash — released May 29, 2026, about 9 months after MAI-1-preview.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.