DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax M3

vs

什么时候选哪个

两者输入输出价格相同,但 deepseek-v4.1-flash 的缓存读取更便宜。需要视频输入和更大输出空间时选 minimax-m3,大量复用文本和图像前缀时可选 deepseek-v4.1-flash。

Benchmark 成绩

MiniMax M3:供应商没有公布 benchmark 成绩。

高于同类均值无更高分DeepSeek V4.1 Flash14 / 194 / 19
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash MiniMax M3 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
DeepSWE 1.1
没有模型得分更高 74.2%
N/A
Cybergym
没有模型得分更高 88.1%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
90.9%
N/A
Agents' Last Exam
31.8%
N/A
Chartography with tools
78.9%
N/A

供应商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

价格

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash MiniMax M3 Δ
输入 / 1M token $0.3 $0.3 =
输出 / 1M token $1.2 $1.2 =
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.006 $0.06 0.1×
缓存写入 不单独收费 不单独收费 -

价格取自构建时的实时目录,最新价格见各模型页面。

两个模型所处的位置:全部 80 个按同一单位计费的聊天模型的每 1M token 输入价分布(对数刻度)

$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash MiniMax M3
工具调用 是 是
思考控制 是,但供应商未公布调节参数 可配置
提示词缓存 隐式(自动) 隐式(自动)
缓存有效期 no fixed TTL (evicted when unused) 未公布
最小缓存前缀 未公布 512 个 token

规格

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash MiniMax M3
输入模态 文本 图像 文本 图像 视频
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-09-10 2026-06-01
上下文窗口 1M 1M
最大输出 393K 524K
思考参数 -
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_split
可选值 -
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
reasoning_split
  • boolean
默认值 - adaptive: thinking on, with the model deciding when extra reasoning helps

规格照录自各供应商的文档;供应商没有公布的项目,对应的行直接省略,不做推断。 完整来源: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · MiniMax M3

同一条提示词,两个模型,经网关实测

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

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning changed the unit economics: the model now spends extra billable tokens internally to “think” before producing the answer, and those reasoning tokens are charged like output tokens even though users never see them. That added token generation—plus longer contexts and occasional retries on harder prompts—roughly doubled our cost per request. We can control this by capping reasoning depth, routing only complex queries to reasoning models, and caching common prompts to bring the bill back down.

输出 423 tok (+327 思考) 延迟 14.6 s

MiniMax M3 通过 · 3 sentences

Reasoning models don't just answer — they first generate extensive internal "thinking" tokens to work through the problem step-by-step, and you're billed for all of those tokens even though users never see them. A query that previously cost ~200 tokens may now cost 2,000–10,000 once reasoning is enabled, multiplying per-query spend by roughly 5–50x while the visible output stayed the same size — that's the doubling. The lever is tuning: cap reasoning effort on simple queries, cache the reasoning traces, and reserve the full reasoning model for only your hardest 10–20% of requests, which typically restores 60–80% of the savings.

输出 764 tok (+629 思考) 延迟 3.5 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,数得出来)、受众适配(对 CFO 说话的口吻),以及下方 token 计数暴露出的隐藏思考计费差额。

提示词 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. 检查 修复通过测试

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通过 · 8/8 cases

```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 ``` The bug is that `cur` is counting equal adjacent pairs, not elements in the current run: every time `xs[i] == xs[i - 1]`, the run length increases by one element, but the first element of the run was never counted, so all runs are undercounted by one. Also, `best` starts at `0`, so single-element inputs return `0` instead of `1`, and a one-element run ending at the last index is missed entirely.

输出 918 tok (+733 思考) 延迟 11.4 s

MiniMax M3 通过 · 8/8 cases

The bug is that the loop starts at index 1 and treats `cur` as the number of *equal transitions* rather than the run length, so a run of *k* consecutive equal items is reported as `k − 1`, and a single-element list (where the loop body never executes) returns 0 instead of 1. A correct version tracks the actual run length by seeding `cur = 1` and resetting it to 1 (not 0) on a mismatch: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 if cur > best: best = cur return best ``` Now `[5]` returns `1`, `[1,1,1]` returns `3`, and a run like `[1,2,2,2]` that ends at the last index is correctly captured as `3` because `cur` is updated before `best` is compared on every iteration, including the final one.

输出 845 tok (+596 思考) 延迟 3.5 s

修复是否真的正确(能运行)、解释的信息密度,以及在一个范围明确的任务上的 token 效率。

提示词 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. 检查 合法 JSON,严格符合 schema

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11.0,"guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

输出 1707 tok (+1667 思考) 延迟 15.1 s

MiniMax M3 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": null, "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null } ```

输出 1002 tok (+955 思考) 延迟 3.6 s

是否严守 schema(不臆造字段)、能否顶住幻觉压力(原文明说暂不给出 guidance),以及结构化输出路径的差异。

提示词 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. 检查 120 词,0 个禁用词

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通过 · 116 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Cache for our API gateway. It stores identical prompt requests and their responses across supported model providers, then serves cached results when a match is found. Teams can cut duplicate inference costs, reduce latency, and keep behavior consistent during provider failover. The cache works with configurable TTLs, per-route rules, and cache-key controls, so you decide what is reusable and what must stay fresh. Does your application send the same prompts to multiple providers? Now your gateway can answer many of those calls without another upstream request. Existing observability dashboards show hit rates, saved tokens, and estimated spend reduction. Enable it in the gateway console, set your policy, and start caching today.

输出 917 tok (+770 思考) 延迟 9.0 s

MiniMax M3 通过 · 121 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing PromptCache, our intelligent caching layer for the API gateway. Tired of paying twice for identical requests? The feature stores prompt-response pairs across every connected provider, returning cached results instead of hitting costly endpoints. Deployment requires only a single configuration flag, and semantic similarity detection happens automatically. Latency drops up to 70% on repeated traffic while costs follow the same downward curve. Developers access detailed cache hit metrics, eviction logs, and provider breakdowns through the dashboard. Whether routing to OpenAI, Anthropic, or local models, every cached token saves time and money. The cache respects TTL policies, supports manual purging, and encrypts stored content. Available today for Pro and Enterprise tiers—enable PromptCache on existing endpoints and watch inference bills shrink immediately.

输出 2808 tok (+2656 思考) 延迟 6.0 s

是否守住约束(字数预算、禁用词表、只能有一个问句)、文风特征,以及长度控制。

改一行代码就能在两个模型之间切换

下方每个标签页里都有两个模型 ID,高亮的那两行是唯一要改的地方。端点不变,API key 不变,请求结构也不变。

from openai import OpenAI

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

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="deepseek-v4.1-flash",
    # model="minimax-m3",  # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

获取 API key →

常见问题

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 和 MiniMax M3 哪个更便宜?

两个模型的「输入 / 1M token」价格相同($0.3),所以这一项上价格分不出高下,请看下方的规格与能力。

不用分别集成两次,就能对 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 和 MiniMax M3 做 A/B 测试吗?

可以。两个模型走同一个 OpenAI 兼容端点,用同一个 API key,切换时只要改一行里的模型名,所以可以给两个模型各分一部分流量,直接对比账单。

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 和 MiniMax M3 支持提示词缓存吗?

支持。两个模型的缓存读取价都低于各自的输入价,所以前缀能反复命中缓存的负载,实际成本会比按官网价估算的低。具体的缓存读取价见上方价格表。

相关对比

我们的实测研究