Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Mistral Large 4

Mistral Large 4 scores 54.6 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M3.1-Flash's 50.5 (D), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash leads on capability. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3588 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash D

Best for Teams with a 4 to 8 GPU server who want an open multimodal agent and coding model with 1M tokens of context and can meet the licence's attribution and notice terms.

Ahead on

  • Capability, 64 against 32

Watch for

No released vLLM or SGLang ran it on 24 October 2026; only llama.cpp b11861 from that day did

Mistral Large 4 C

Best for Operators with an 8-GPU Blackwell or H200 node who want a frontier-sized open model for coding agents and defensive security, with a hosted twin on Mistral's API.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 50 against 40
  • Risk, 75 against 35
  • Agent interface, 95 against 70
  • Documentation and upkeep, 64 against 41

Watch for

The smallest 4-bit build needs about 732 GB, so nothing fits a single workstation or a 128 GB machine

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMistral Large 4Edge
Capability35%356432MiniMax-M3.1-Flash +32
Reach25%254050Mistral Large 4 +10
Risk20%203575Mistral Large 4 +40
Agent interface10%107095Mistral Large 4 +25
Documentation and upkeep10%104164Mistral Large 4 +23
Negative events≤1500
TotalD 50.5/100C 54.6/100

Facts side by side

FactMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMistral Large 4
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMiniMaxMistral AI
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceMiniMax Community License (custom; commercial use needs a "Built with MiniMax M3.1-Flash" line and a one-time notice to MiniMax, and MiniMax's written authorisation above $20M yearly revenue)Mistral Ecosystem Open-Weight License (modified MIT)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-232026-10-29
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews2.3/5 (4)none

Verdicts

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

A 428B mixture-of-experts model, 23B active, for agent work, coding and computer use, with image and video input, about 1M tokens of context and parallel tool calls. It needs a 4 to 8 GPU server for 250 GB of NVFP4 and MXFP8 weights, and vLLM and SGLang support was pre-release on 24 October 2026. Commercial use needs attribution and notice.

Mistral Large 4

A frontier-sized open cousin for coding agents and defensive security, with strict JSON Schema output, parallel tool calls and three reasoning efforts. It needs a multi-GPU server, about 732 GB for the smallest 4-bit build, and vLLM and SGLang run it only from special images. The main risk is a licence that bars Model-as-a-Service businesses without a separate deal.

Before you call either

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

  1. Check the use case first; commercial products must show "Built with MiniMax M3.1-Flash" and notify MiniMax once, or get written authorisation above $20M yearly revenue
  2. On 8 H100 or H200 GPUs use vLLM's nightly image vllm/vllm-openai:minimax-m31-flash with --tensor-parallel-size 8 --block-size 128 --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --moe-backend marlin --max-model-len 262144
  3. Pass --reasoning-parser minimax_m3 --tool-call-parser minimax_m3 --enable-auto-tool-choice in vLLM, or minimax-m3 for both in SGLang with --trust-remote-code
  4. --block-size 128 is mandatory in vLLM, since MSA's sparse block size is 128
  5. Set effort per request with chat_template_kwargs reasoning_effort (low, medium, high, xhigh, max); sample at temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95
  6. On Blackwell or MI355X, 4 GPUs serve it with the DSpark draft from dspark/; vLLM's Hopper command leaves DSpark off and turns video input off
  7. For GGUF builds by others, use llama.cpp b11861 or later; earlier builds mis-scale the NVFP4 experts and produce garbage
  8. Without the hardware, call MiniMax-M3.1-Flash on MiniMax's API (minimax-api), whose thinking defaults to max effort

Mistral Large 4

  1. Serve the NVFP4 build on Blackwell with vllm/vllm-openai:mistral-large-4 --model mistralai/Mistral-Large-4-1T-A52B-NVFP4 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --kv-cache-dtype fp8_ds_mla --tool-call-parser mistral --reasoning-parser mistral --enable-auto-tool-choice; released vLLM doesn't load it
  2. On H200 use the FP8 build with tensor parallelism of 16 or 8 by 2 pipelines, per vLLM's recipe
  3. Pass reasoning_effort low, medium or high (default high); any other value makes the template raise an error, and there is no off switch
  4. Read the reasoning from message.reasoning; max_completion_tokens counts reasoning tokens too
  5. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 at every effort, per the card
  6. Ask for JSON with response_format type json_schema and strict true; the template passes the schema to the model
  7. The template rejects a tool message straight after a user message and a conversation that doesn't start with a user or system message
  8. Add --speculative-config '{"method": "dspark", "num_speculative_tokens": 3}' to use the embedded draft head
  9. If you'll offer it to others as a hosted model, read the licence first; Model-as-a-Service use needs Mistral's commercial licence

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, MiniMax-M3.1-Flash or Mistral Large 4?

Mistral Large 4 scores 54.6 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M3.1-Flash's 50.5 (D), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash leads on capability.

Other comparisons with MiniMax-M3.1-Flash or Mistral Large 4

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.