FRESH

Hacker News

MiniMax M3 vs. GLM 5.2: Codegen comparison across autonomous coding tasks

32 points by oceanwaves

by adrian_b

1 subcomments

The comparison results seem very plausible.
From the conclusion, I agree with:
> I wouldn't make either one the top-level coordinator by default.
But I do not agree with the follow-up sentence:
> The best shape is still a frontier coordinator or judge above them: GPT-5.5 or Claude Opus deciding what to delegate, checking the finished work, and rerunning narrow pieces when the answer looks wrong. These models make the worker layer much more serious, not the coordinator layer unnecessary.
For the coordinator or judge above them I would put myself, not a too expensive LLM under the control of an external entity, achieving thus simultaneously higher quality, lower cost and greater security.

by throwa356262

0 subcomment

Since I quit my Claude subscription, every month I spend $20 (the cost of CC pro plan) playing around with new models and new providers.
Currently testing M3 for agentic tasks. It works OK and their token plan is very cheap. Highly recommend for claw / hermes type of work.
Tested GLM 5.1 for coding last month and it burned through my tokens a bit too quickly, but it worked well enough.

by scottchiefbaker

1 subcomments

FWIW Opencode Go is giving 3x MiniMax M3 access right now. According to their chart you get almost 10x as much access to MM3 vs GLM 5.2.
Considering how close the models are, the extra free queries may be worth it.

by killingtime74

1 subcomments

I've used both and they are great. Would be better to have a GPT or Opus benchmark

by oceanwaves

1 subcomments

GLM 5.2 edges as the safer pick when tasks are more challenging from-scratch builds and the result needs to arrive as a complete, runnable project. MiniMax M3 is the value pick for a lot of worker traffic.