// head_to_head

MiniMax M3 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

MiniMax M3 and Qwen3.7 Plus are priced within ~10% of each other.

Qwen3.7 Plus does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

minimax

MiniMax M3

Blended / 1M
$0.525
Context
1.0M
Released
May 31, 2026
Overall score
67.3
reasoningtool callingimage inputvideo inputprompt caching

qwen

Qwen3.7 Plus

Blended / 1M
$0.560
Context
1M
Released
Jun 3, 2026
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningtool callingimage inputprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricMiniMax M3Qwen3.7 Plus
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

67.3
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.0339
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$0.525$0.560
Input price / 1M$0.300$0.320
Output price / 1M$1.20$1.28
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.060$0.064
Context window1.0M1M
Max output tokens512Kwin131K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — MiniMax M3 on top, Qwen3.7 Plus below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
40.7
Coding
68.2
Reasoning
74.5
Mathematics
76.9
Data analysis
76.2
Language
76.8
Instruction following
57.5

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadMiniMax M3Qwen3.7 Plus
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$150.72/mo$160.77/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$216.00/mo$230.40/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$201.60/mo$215.04/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$378.00/mo$403.20/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$750.00/mo$800.00/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

MiniMax M3 vs Qwen3.7 Plus FAQ

Which is better, MiniMax M3 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

MiniMax M3 and Qwen3.7 Plus are priced within ~10% of each other. Qwen3.7 Plus does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is MiniMax M3 cheaper than Qwen3.7 Plus?

They cost about the same. Both land near $0.525 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

Does MiniMax M3 or Qwen3.7 Plus have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 1.0M for MiniMax M3 and 1M for Qwen3.7 Plus.

Do MiniMax M3 and Qwen3.7 Plus support prompt caching?

Both publish a cached-input rate: $0.060 per million for MiniMax M3 and $0.064 for Qwen3.7 Plus, against full input rates of $0.300 and $0.320. On a workload with a long stable prefix — a system prompt, a tool schema, a retrieved corpus — that changes the economics more than the headline price does.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.