Pick MiniMax M3 for open-weight 428b moe (~23b active per token) with a 1m-token context or native multimodal input — text, image and video. Pick Mistral Medium 3.5 for strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier or 128b dense open-weight model — self-hostable. On a tight budget at scale, MiniMax M3 is the value pick.
MiniMax M3 (MiniMax, China) and Mistral Medium 3.5 (Mistral AI, France) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. MiniMax M3 is miniMax's open-weight 428B multimodal model with a 1M context — strong reported coding (59.0 SWE-Bench Pro) at low entry pricing. Mistral Medium 3.5 is mistral's efficient 128B open-weight model — a single dense model unifying reasoning and coding that punches above its size on independent tests (AA Index 30). They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: MiniMax M3 is about 5× cheaper on input ($0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens vs $1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
Context window: MiniMax M3 holds 4.1× more — 1M (~1,573 pages) vs 256K (~384 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: MiniMax M3 is the newer model by about 33 days (released June 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-France matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
MiniMax M3
Mistral Medium 3.5
Provider
MiniMax (China)
Mistral AI (France)
Released
June 2026
April 29, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,573 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens
$1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, video, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Open-weight 428B MoE (~23B active per token) with a 1M-token context: MiniMax M3 — Its 1M window holds about 4.1× more than Mistral Medium 3.5's 256K in a single prompt.
Native multimodal input — text, image and video: MiniMax M3 — Mistral Medium 3.5 is comparatively weak here — no native video or audio
Reports 59.0 on SWE-Bench Pro (a strong open-weight score), surpassing GPT-5.5: MiniMax M3 — MiniMax's open-weight 428B multimodal model with a 1M context — strong reported coding (59.0 SWE-Bench Pro) at low entry pricing — and it runs cheaper at $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens.
Strong intelligence-for-size — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 30, near the top of its price tier: Mistral Medium 3.5 — MiniMax M3 is comparatively weak here — price doubles to $0.60/$2.40 above 512K tokens — not flat across 1M
128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable: Mistral Medium 3.5 — Mistral Medium 3.5 lists 128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable among its strengths; MiniMax M3 does not.
Unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort: Mistral Medium 3.5 — Mistral Medium 3.5 lists unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort among its strengths; MiniMax M3 does not.
Lowest cost at scale: MiniMax M3 — At $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input: MiniMax M3 — Its 1M window is about 4.1× larger than Mistral Medium 3.5's 256K, fitting roughly 1,573 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: MiniMax M3 — At $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Mistral Medium 3.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: MiniMax M3 — Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is open-weight 428b moe (~23b active per token) with a 1m-token context: MiniMax M3 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier: Mistral Medium 3.5 — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: Mistral Medium 3.5 or MiniMax M3 — Origin (China vs France) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
MiniMax M3: where it fits
MiniMax's open-weight 428B multimodal model with a 1M context — strong reported coding (59.0 SWE-Bench Pro) at low entry pricing. Released June 2026 by MiniMax, it is built for open-weight 428B MoE (~23B active per token) with a 1M-token context, native multimodal input — text, image and video, reports 59.0 on SWE-Bench Pro (a strong open-weight score), surpassing GPT-5.5, and low entry pricing at $0.30/$1.20 per million up to 512K tokens.
Its trade-offs are real: price doubles to $0.60/$2.40 above 512K tokens — not flat across 1M, miniMax's own reported 80.5 SWE-Bench Verified figure is vendor-stated, not independently verified, sWE-Bench Pro is a different, harder benchmark than SWE-Bench Verified, and newer than M2.7 but with less independent testing so far. At $0.3 in / $1.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Mistral Medium 3.5: where it fits
Mistral's efficient 128B open-weight model — a single dense model unifying reasoning and coding that punches above its size on independent tests (AA Index 30). Released April 29, 2026 by Mistral AI, it is built for strong intelligence-for-size — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 30, near the top of its price tier, 128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable, unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort, and 256K context with text and image input.
Its trade-offs: below the absolute frontier — a value/efficiency pick, not a flagship-beater, output pricing ($7.50/M) is higher than the cheapest Chinese rivals, license framing ('open' vs enterprise) varies across sources — confirm terms for commercial use, and no native video or audio. At $1.5 in / $7.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." MiniMax M3 (China) and Mistral Medium 3.5 (France) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. MiniMax M3 is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Frequently asked questions
Is MiniMax M3 or Mistral Medium 3.5 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, MiniMax M3 leans toward open-weight 428b moe (~23b active per token) with a 1m-token context while Mistral Medium 3.5 leans toward strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M3 or Mistral Medium 3.5?
MiniMax M3 is cheaper — $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens vs $1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens, roughly 5× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax M3 — 1M vs 256K, about 4.1× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both MiniMax M3 and Mistral Medium 3.5 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you MiniMax M3, Mistral Medium 3.5 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, MiniMax M3 or Mistral Medium 3.5?
MiniMax M3 — released June 2026, about 33 days after Mistral Medium 3.5.
MiniMax M3 vs Mistral Medium 3.5
MiniMax · China | Mistral AI · France · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick MiniMax M3 for open-weight 428b moe (~23b active per token) with a 1m-token context or native multimodal input — text, image and video. Pick Mistral Medium 3.5 for strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier or 128b dense open-weight model — self-hostable. On a tight budget at scale, MiniMax M3 is the value pick.
MiniMax M3 (MiniMax, China) and Mistral Medium 3.5 (Mistral AI, France) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. MiniMax M3 is miniMax's open-weight 428B multimodal model with a 1M context — strong reported coding (59.0 SWE-Bench Pro) at low entry pricing. Mistral Medium 3.5 is mistral's efficient 128B open-weight model — a single dense model unifying reasoning and coding that punches above its size on independent tests (AA Index 30). They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: MiniMax M3 is about 5× cheaper on input ($0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens vs $1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
▸Context window: MiniMax M3 holds 4.1× more — 1M (~1,573 pages) vs 256K (~384 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: MiniMax M3 is the newer model by about 33 days (released June 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-France matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
MiniMax M3
Mistral Medium 3.5
Provider
MiniMax (China)
Mistral AI (France)
Released
June 2026
April 29, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,573 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens
$1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, image, video, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Open-weight 428B MoE (~23B active per token) with a 1M-token context
MiniMax M3
Its 1M window holds about 4.1× more than Mistral Medium 3.5's 256K in a single prompt.
Native multimodal input — text, image and video
MiniMax M3
Mistral Medium 3.5 is comparatively weak here — no native video or audio
Reports 59.0 on SWE-Bench Pro (a strong open-weight score), surpassing GPT-5.5
MiniMax M3
MiniMax's open-weight 428B multimodal model with a 1M context — strong reported coding (59.0 SWE-Bench Pro) at low entry pricing — and it runs cheaper at $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens.
Strong intelligence-for-size — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 30, near the top of its price tier
Mistral Medium 3.5
MiniMax M3 is comparatively weak here — price doubles to $0.60/$2.40 above 512K tokens — not flat across 1M
128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable
Mistral Medium 3.5
Mistral Medium 3.5 lists 128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable among its strengths; MiniMax M3 does not.
Unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort
Mistral Medium 3.5
Mistral Medium 3.5 lists unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort among its strengths; MiniMax M3 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
MiniMax M3
At $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
MiniMax M3
Its 1M window is about 4.1× larger than Mistral Medium 3.5's 256K, fitting roughly 1,573 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ MiniMax M3
At $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Mistral Medium 3.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ MiniMax M3
Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is open-weight 428b moe (~23b active per token) with a 1m-token context
→ MiniMax M3
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier
→ Mistral Medium 3.5
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Mistral Medium 3.5 or MiniMax M3
Origin (China vs France) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
MiniMax M3: where it fits
MiniMax's open-weight 428B multimodal model with a 1M context — strong reported coding (59.0 SWE-Bench Pro) at low entry pricing. Released June 2026 by MiniMax, it is built for open-weight 428B MoE (~23B active per token) with a 1M-token context, native multimodal input — text, image and video, reports 59.0 on SWE-Bench Pro (a strong open-weight score), surpassing GPT-5.5, and low entry pricing at $0.30/$1.20 per million up to 512K tokens.
Its trade-offs are real: price doubles to $0.60/$2.40 above 512K tokens — not flat across 1M, miniMax's own reported 80.5 SWE-Bench Verified figure is vendor-stated, not independently verified, sWE-Bench Pro is a different, harder benchmark than SWE-Bench Verified, and newer than M2.7 but with less independent testing so far. At $0.3 in / $1.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Mistral Medium 3.5: where it fits
Mistral's efficient 128B open-weight model — a single dense model unifying reasoning and coding that punches above its size on independent tests (AA Index 30). Released April 29, 2026 by Mistral AI, it is built for strong intelligence-for-size — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 30, near the top of its price tier, 128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable, unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort, and 256K context with text and image input.
Its trade-offs: below the absolute frontier — a value/efficiency pick, not a flagship-beater, output pricing ($7.50/M) is higher than the cheapest Chinese rivals, license framing ('open' vs enterprise) varies across sources — confirm terms for commercial use, and no native video or audio. At $1.5 in / $7.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." MiniMax M3 (China) and Mistral Medium 3.5 (France) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. MiniMax M3 is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Want both MiniMax M3 and Mistral Medium 3.5 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 MiniMax M3 or Mistral Medium 3.5 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, MiniMax M3 leans toward open-weight 428b moe (~23b active per token) with a 1m-token context while Mistral Medium 3.5 leans toward strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, MiniMax M3 or Mistral Medium 3.5?
MiniMax M3 is cheaper — $0.3/$1.2 per 1M tokens vs $1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens, roughly 5× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiniMax M3 — 1M vs 256K, about 4.1× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both MiniMax M3 and Mistral Medium 3.5 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you MiniMax M3, Mistral Medium 3.5 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, MiniMax M3 or Mistral Medium 3.5?
MiniMax M3 — released June 2026, about 33 days after Mistral Medium 3.5.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.