MiniMax M3.1 Flash

MiniMax's model, with open weights. Forcebench has run it in 1 configuration on the Local board. API is models reached through a hosted service; Local, models served on Forcebench’s own hardware.

On the Local board

Models served on Forcebench’s own hardware. MiniMax M3.1 Flash is ranked by its one configuration: the tenth-highest score of 16 models, not clearly different from 9 other models. Scores are within 3 attempts (c@3) with 95% intervals; each configuration is compared with the highest-scoring one by whether their 95% intervals overlap. Every configuration on the board →

42%
within 3 attempts (c@3), 95% CI 37–47 · high · tenth-highest score of 16 models, not clearly different from 9 other models
9.6k
output tokens per task · median 5.6k, p90 25k
958 s
median per task, every attempt counted, on 4× NVIDIA GB10, 128 GB each (3× DGX Spark, 1× Gigabyte AI TOP ATOM) · 90th percentile 5347 s
0%
no answer within the 32,768-token budget
Every configuration of MiniMax M3.1 Flash on the Local board
ConfigurationRank all configsWithin 3 attempts c@3 · 95% CITokens mean · median · p90No answerLatency median per task, every attempt counted
NVFP4 experts, MXFP8 (QAT) · vLLM · high · 4× NVIDIA GB10, 128 GB each (3× DGX Spark, 1× Gigabyte AI TOP ATOM)highest score18
42%95% CI 37–47
9.6k5.6k · 25k0%958 s

Latency depends on the hardware: compare it only between configurations on the same hardware.

Suites, at its highest-scoring configuration
high · NVFP4 experts, MXFP8 (QAT) · vLLM · 4× NVIDIA GB10, 128 GB each (3× DGX Spark, 1× Gigabyte AI TOP ATOM): within 3 attempts (c@3) on each suite with 95% intervals, against the median of the Local board's models, each at its highest-scoring configuration.
  • 95% interval
  • Local board median
55%, 95% interval 34–74%
33%, 95% interval 16–56%
35%, 95% interval 17–59%
40%, 95% interval 22–61%
12%, 95% interval 3–34%
0%, 95% interval 0–18%
17%, 95% interval 6–39%
68%, 95% interval 46–85%
83%, 95% interval 61–94%
50%, 95% interval 29–71%
28%, 95% interval 13–51%
67%, 95% interval 42–85%
11%, 95% interval 3–33%
85%, 95% interval 64–95%
50%, 95% interval 29–71%
    Show the numbers
    Per-suite scores of MiniMax M3.1 Flash's highest-scoring configuration on the Local board, with the board's median
    Suitec@3 95% CILocal medianTasks
    Apex
    55%95% CI 34–74
    70%20
    Salesforce APIs
    33%95% CI 16–56
    42%18
    CI/CD
    35%95% CI 17–59
    44%17
    Salesforce CLI
    40%95% CI 22–61
    38%20
    Salesforce docs
    12%95% CI 3–34
    12%17
    fflib Enterprise Patterns
    0%95% CI 0–18
    17%18
    Flow
    17%95% CI 6–39
    17%18
    Governor limits & pushback
    68%95% CI 46–85
    76%19
    Lightning Web Components
    83%95% CI 61–94
    83%18
    Nonprofit Success Pack
    50%95% CI 29–71
    56%18
    Packaging
    28%95% CI 13–51
    28%18
    Permissions & access
    67%95% CI 42–85
    57%15
    Scratch org definitions
    11%95% CI 3–33
    11%18
    SOQL
    85%95% CI 64–95
    85%20
    Trigger Actions Framework
    50%95% CI 29–71
    42%18

    In the studies

    Want this for your team?

    Azul Labs runs Forcebench privately for two kinds of Salesforce team.

    Choosing a model to run yourself?

    A private benchmark of your shortlist

    Open-weight models at the quantisations and reasoning efforts you could run on infrastructure you control, tested on your kind of Salesforce work, with a written recommendation.

    • Private tasks written from your work only ever run on local models; they are never sent to an API.
    • Re-testing after any change of model, quantisation or engine is available.
    • Typical turnaround is 2–3 weeks; large models take about a day of machine time per configuration.

    Building or buying a Salesforce AI tool?

    A private evaluation of your tool

    Your tool on held-out tasks it has never seen, against API baselines (models reached through a hosted service) and Local ones (served on Forcebench’s own hardware), with a written report on where it holds up and where it fails.

    • It can start as a smaller pilot, about 30 held-out tasks with your tool against two baselines, before a full evaluation.
    • Repeat evaluations after your releases are available.
    • Typical turnaround is 2–3 weeks.

    Fixed fee, quoted up front. The quote depends on the number of tasks and the number of models, tools or configurations tested.

    Or email leo@azl.au · azl.au