🎁 新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Gemini 3.6 Flash vs MiniMax M3

vs

何時該用哪一個 — 綜合評斷,而非基準測試數據表

涉及音訊時選 gemini-3.6-flash:它是兩者中唯一在文字、影像和視訊之外還接受音訊輸入的(每百萬音訊 token $5,快取 $0.5),而且它 1048576 token 的脈絡略勝對方的 1000000。minimax-m3 每百萬輸入 $0.3、輸出 $1.2,對比 $1.5 和 $7.5,即輸入便宜 5 倍、輸出便宜 6.25 倍,並且允許最多 524288 輸出 token,而 gemini-3.6-flash 上限是 65536。minimax-m3 還允許關閉思考,並標記了推理和長脈絡能力,而 gemini-3.6-flash 始終在思考。

定價

Gemini 3.6 Flash MiniMax M3 Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $1.5 $0.3
輸出 / 1M tokens $7.5 $1.2 6.3×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.15 $0.06 2.5×
快取寫入 不額外計費

費率取自建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面皆附有目前的費率卡。

它們的相對位置 — 在此計費單位下,所有 63 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

Gemini 3.6 Flash · $1.5 MiniMax M3 · $0.3
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

Gemini 3.6 Flash MiniMax M3
工具使用
思考控制 常駐開啟 可配置
結構化輸出
提示快取 隱式 + 顯式 隱式(自動)
快取生命週期 未公開 未公開
最小快取前綴 4096 個 token 512 個 token

規格

Gemini 3.6 Flash MiniMax M3
輸入模態 文字 影像 音訊 影片 文字 影像 影片
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-06-01
知識截止日期 2026-03
上下文視窗 1M 1M
最大輸出 66K 524K
思考參數 thinkingLevel
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_split
可接受的值
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
reasoning_split
  • boolean
預設值 medium adaptive: thinking on, with the model deciding when extra reasoning helps

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商未發布的資料列會直接省略,而非自行推測。 完整來源: Gemini 3.6 Flash · MiniMax M3

單一提示詞,兩款模型 — 經由閘道測量

提示詞 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 檢查 恰好 3 句

Gemini 3.6 Flash 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate thousands of internal "thinking" tokens behind the scenes to process logic before delivering the final response. Because our vendor bills us for every token generated—including these intermediate processing steps—our billable output volume per query surged significantly. Since output tokens carry a much higher unit cost than input tokens, this jump in processing volume directly doubled our overall spend.

輸出 893 tok (+816 思考) 延遲 4.7 s

MiniMax M3 通過 · 3 sentences

Reasoning-enabled models deliberately produce extensive internal "chain-of-thought" tokens before answering, often consuming 5–10x more tokens per query than a standard model. Because LLM providers bill per token for both that reasoning trace and the final response, your cost-per-query rises proportionally—and that multiplier is the primary driver of the doubled bill. The right response isn't to disable reasoning, but to route only genuinely complex queries to it while keeping routine traffic on the cheaper standard tier, which typically recovers 60–80% of the cost without sacrificing quality where it matters.

輸出 665 tok (+548 思考) 延遲 5.7 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,可數)、受眾適配(面向 CFO 的語氣),以及下方 token 計量所暴露的隱藏思考計費缺口。

提示詞 This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. 檢查 修復通過測試

Gemini 3.6 Flash 通過 · 8/8 cases

Here is the fixed function along with an explanation of the bugs: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ### Explanation The original function initialized `cur` and `best` to `0` and incremented `cur` on matching adjacent items, which meant it was counting identical adjacent *pairs* rather than the total number of *elements* in a run. This caused single-element inputs to skip the loop and return `0` instead of `1`, and undercounted all run lengths by 1 (for example, a run of two items at the end of the list resulted in `cur = 1`). […]

輸出 2034 tok (+1768 思考) 延遲 10.0 s

MiniMax M3 通過 · 8/8 cases

The bug is in the loop bound: `range(1, len(xs))` iterates from index 1 up to but not including `len(xs) - 1`... wait, actually it goes up to `len(xs) - 1`, so the last index is included. The real problems are two: 1. **Starting `best` and `cur` at 0** and iterating from index 1 means a single-element list (`len(xs) == 1`) never enters the loop, so the function returns `0` instead of `1`. The fix is to either seed `best = cur = 1` when `xs` is non-empty, or include index 0 in the loop logic. 2. **Missing the final run**: the function only updates `best` *inside* the loop when it finds a continuation. If the longest run ends at the very last element, the loop body never gets to compare it after the increment — actually it does, but only if the run is longer than the previous `best`. […]

輸出 464 tok 延遲 7.9 s

修復是否真的正確(可執行)、解釋的資訊密度,以及在一個邊界明確的任務上的 token 效率。

提示詞 Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. 檢查 合法 JSON,schema 精確

Gemini 3.6 Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": "withheld" } ```

輸出 2843 tok (+2783 思考) 延遲 13.1 s

MiniMax M3 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ```

輸出 2212 tok (+2161 思考) 延遲 23.3 s

schema 服從度(不臆造欄位)、幻覺壓力(guidance 明確被暫緩給出),以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。

提示詞 Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. 檢查 120 詞,0 個禁用詞

Gemini 3.6 Flash 未命中 · 60 words, 0 banned, 0 questions

72: reducing 73: your 74: monthly 75: token 76: spend. S6 (21): 77: You 78: can 79: easily 80: set 81: custom 82: expiration 83: rules, 84: configure 85: TTL 86: settings, 87: and 88: manage 89: cache 90: invalidation 91: across 92: all 93: vendors 94: from 95: one 96: centralized 97: dashboard. S7 (23): 98: Start 99: optimizing […]

輸出 4092 tok (+3929 思考) 延遲 16.3 s

MiniMax M3 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing PromptCache, our new API gateway feature that caches prompts across multiple LLM providers. Developers can store prompt-completion pairs centrally, reducing redundant inference calls and lowering costs without sacrificing quality. How will your workflow change when repeated requests resolve instantly from a shared cache layer? The gateway intercepts outgoing requests, checks for matching prompt fingerprints, and serves previously generated completions when available, falling back to the original provider on misses. Compatible with OpenAI, Anthropic, Cohere, and custom endpoints, PromptCache integrates with existing routing rules and supports TTL, versioning, and per-tenant namespaces. Teams now gain predictable latency, reduced token spend, and improved throughput during traffic spikes today. […]

輸出 3256 tok (+2892 思考) 延遲 21.5 s

約束服從度(字數預算、禁用詞表、唯一的那句問句)、文風指紋,以及長度控制。

只需一行程式碼即可在兩者間切換

以下每個頁籤中都有這兩個 ID — 醒目提示的這兩行是唯一的修改處。相同的端點,相同的金鑰,相同的請求結構。

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="gemini-3.6-flash",
    # model="minimax-m3",  # 取消註解此行,並註解上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

Gemini 3.6 Flash 和 MiniMax M3 哪個比較便宜?

MiniMax M3 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜($0.3 對比 $1.5,相差 5.0×)。其他項目可能呈現相反結果 — 上表提供完整資訊,實際成本取決於您的使用組合。

我可以在不進行兩次整合的情況下,對 Gemini 3.6 Flash 和 MiniMax M3 進行 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩者皆透過同一個相容 OpenAI 的端點提供服務,並使用同一把 API 金鑰 — 切換只需更改一行的模型字串,因此您可以將部分流量分別導向兩者並直接比較帳單。

Gemini 3.6 Flash 與 MiniMax M3 支援提示快取嗎?

是的 — 兩者的快取讀取費率皆低於其輸入費率,因此具有暖前綴的工作負載成本會低於牌價所示。確切的快取讀取列請見上方的定價表。

相關比較