Sign in

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

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash

Step 3.7 Flash scores 59.8 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M3.1-Flash's 54.3 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons

MiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax · Open-weight model C54.3/100#131 of 160 open-weight models Step 3.7 FlashStepFun · Open-weight model C59.8/100#93 of 160 open-weight models

Which one, for what

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash C

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.

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

SGLang's cookbook still points to a pull request or a dev image on 4 November 2026, and vLLM's recipe still names a nightly image, though both runtimes' releases carry the model code

Step 3.7 Flash C

Best for Teams with a GPU server or a provider account that want an open, long-context agent model with vision

Ahead on

  • Reach, 70 against 55
  • Risk, 45 against 35
  • Agent interface, 85 against 70

Watch for

About 131 GB to run at 4 bits with images, over a 128 GB machine's share

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Reach Step 3.7 Flash +15

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 55

Memory earns nothing. MiniMax's only build is its 250 GB NVFP4 and MXFP8 release, about 300 GB with the fifth added, above 256 GB, and no runtime library has a local build. Runtimes earn 20. llama.cpp from b11861 runs it, Ollama v0.40.14 pins llama.cpp b11963 with the minimax-m3 architecture, vLLM v0.33.0 (tagged 1 November 2026) registers the architecture and meets its recipe's minimum version, and SGLang v0.5.23 (tagged 29 October) registers it with M3.1 processor code and tests, though its cookbook still points to a pull request. Transformers support is in progress per the card and LM Studio has no entry. Builds earn 10 for one publisher precision. Terms earn 10, since commercial use is free with attribution and a notice below $20M of yearly revenue. Download earns 10, with no gate. Hosted earns 5, since MiniMax's API and Novita serve it. 0 + 20 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 55.

Step 3.7 Flash 70

Memory 5, the smallest build at 4 bits is StepFun's IQ4_XS GGUF, 104.99 GB with the 3.97 GB projector, and 108.96 GB × 1.2 = 130.8 GB, over what the reference machine can give a model and within 256 GB. The IQ3 and Q3 builds are below 4 bits and aren't read. Runtimes 20, Released vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 have the step3p7 model, and llama.cpp b12242 has the architecture, with StepFun's own GGUF. Four at 5 each, and the card documents all four. Builds 15, StepFun publishes GGUF at five quantised precisions, an FP8 build and an NVFP4 build. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata and its licence section, an OSI licence with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for all four repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, StepFun's own API serves it, per the card and our StepFun API listing, and Featherless and DeepInfra are live for it on Hugging Face. 5 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 5 = 70.

Agent interface Step 3.7 Flash +15

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 70

The chat template earns 20 for chat_template.jinja in the repository. The tool-calling format earns 10, since only the template shows the format and the parsers come from vLLM's and SGLang's own docs. Trained tool calling earns 20, with several invoke blocks in one call. Structured output earns nothing, as it isn't documented. Reasoning control earns 10, with reasoning_effort per request on the card and the reasoning in mm:think tags. Context earns 10 for 1,048,576 tokens with no position scaling.

Step 3.7 Flash 85

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (5,723 characters). Tool-calling format 25, the card names the parser to use in two runtimes, step3p5 in vLLM (with auto tool choice) and in SGLang, and both ship Step parsers in a release. Trained tool calling 20, the card presents tool orchestration as a main use, with multi-turn results, and the template renders every call in a turn. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained output for the weights. Reasoning control 10, the template has a reasoning_effort setting and keeps reasoning_content, and the card names the step3p5 reasoning parser for vLLM and SGLang, which returns the reasoning apart from the answer. Context 10, 256K tokens per the card, and 262,144 positions in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 85.

Risk Step 3.7 Flash +10

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 35

File safety earns 15, safetensors only, less 10 because the SGLang route the card links passes trust_remote_code for the repository's configuration and processor code. Provenance earns the full 15, files in the organisation MiniMax links to with a SHA-256 for each shard. Safety evaluation and agent guidance earn nothing; the launch post's security testing measured offensive capability, and the template's root role isn't documented as a trained hierarchy. Licence risk earns 5, after the military-use ban and the $20M threshold. The security programme earns nothing, with no security.txt, disclosure policy or advisories.

Step 3.7 Flash 45

File safety 15, safetensors and GGUF only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, the files sit in the stepfun-ai organisation, which the card's StepFun platform and model page belong to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations section and gives no guidance on prompt injection, instruction priority, refusals or safeguards. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, threshold or change clause. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card, and our StepFun API listing found no security.txt, bug bounty or disclosure policy. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 45.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runMiniMax-M3.1-FlashStep 3.7 FlashEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%255570Step 3.7 Flash +15
Risk20%203545Step 3.7 Flash +10
Agent interface10%107085Step 3.7 Flash +15
Documentation and upkeep10%104139MiniMax-M3.1-Flash +2
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 54.3/100C 59.8/100

Facts side by side

FactMiniMax-M3.1-FlashStep 3.7 Flash
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMiniMaxStepFun
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)Apache-2.0 (metadata and card; no LICENSE file)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-232026-06-03
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews2.3/5 (4)none

How the scores have moved

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

Step 3.7 Flash

No score change since it was listed.

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. vLLM 0.33.0 and SGLang 0.5.23 carry its code. Commercial use needs attribution and notice.

Step 3.7 Flash

A capable open agent model with a clean licence, every kind of build and four released runtimes. Two things hold it back: it's a little too big for a 128 GB machine at 4 bits, whatever the card says, and StepFun has gone quiet on the repository since June. No safety results, limitations or data description.

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 0.33.0 or later, or the recipe's 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

Step 3.7 Flash

  1. On a 128 GB machine the 4-bit GGUF won't fit with a working context. Use StepFun's API or a provider, or a server
  2. On vLLM or SGLang pass --tool-call-parser step3p5 --reasoning-parser step3p5
  3. The card's commands pass trust-remote-code. Released Transformers 5.22.2 has the model built in if you'd rather not run the repository's code
  4. For llama.cpp load the mmproj file from StepFun's GGUF repository for image input
  5. StepFun's API has two hosts. Use the one where your key was issued, api.stepfun.ai or api.stepfun.com
  6. The same model is on our StepFun API listing, with prices and terms

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, MiniMax-M3.1-Flash or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash scores 59.8 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M3.1-Flash's 54.3 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories.

Other comparisons with MiniMax-M3.1-Flash or Step 3.7 Flash

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.

Get an auditSee a sample report