Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. MiniMax M1vsSolar Pro 4
Updated Aug 2026

MiniMax M1vsSolar Pro 4

Solar Pro 4 is cheaper than MiniMax M1 at $0.09/M vs $0.3/M input tokens.

MiniMax M1 and Solar Pro 4 compared across 14 shared prompts
SpecMiniMax M1Solar Pro 4
Input price$0.3/M tokens$0.09/M tokens
Output price$1.65/M tokens$0.36/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens524K tokens
WeightsOpen—
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedJun 2025Aug 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 14 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

MiniMax M1794 words
Identified Issues and Solutions 1. Failure Modes: a. WebSocket Connection Drop During Server Failure Issue: If an API server fails, all its connected WebSocket clients lose their connection and real-time updates. Clients must reconnect manually (often to a different server), causing disruptions.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,598 words
This architecture contains several fundamental mismatches between real-time collaborative editing requirements and the chosen patterns. Below is a systematic breakdown of failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks, each with a targeted solution and explicit trade-offs.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

MiniMax M1643 words
Technological Implications (1920–1980): Early Electronics Revolution: The transistor’s 1920 invention would accelerate the miniaturization and efficiency of electronics. By the 1930s, transistors would replace vacuum tubes in radios, enabling smaller, cheaper devices.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,638 words
The Premise: The 1920 Solid-State Breakthrough For this scenario to function, we must assume a functional point-contact or junction transistor is demonstrated in 1920 (perhaps by Lilienfeld or an early Bell Labs precursor), and crucially, that methods for purifying semiconductor materials (germanium/silicon) are solved…
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

MiniMax M1672 words
Here's a delicious, fast, and flexible recipe using 7 common pantry staples: Dish Name: Sun-Drenched Chickpea Scramble (Inspired by chickpea "scrambles" or shakshuka variations, using pantry essentials) Flavor Profile: Savory, earthy, bright, slightly tangy, and warmly spiced.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 4294 words
🍝 Golden Umami Silk Noodles A savory-sweet pasta dish that transforms basic pantry staples into a glossy, flavorful meal. It's quick, comforting, and relies on the balance of soy, honey, and butter for a rich sauce without needing fresh produce.
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

MiniMax M1588 words
Action Plan for the Next 48 Hours Priorities: Patient safety, ethical compliance, regulatory transparency, and mitigating financial/PR fallout. Hours 0–6: Assemble Crisis Team & Confirm Data Hour 0–2: Assemble cross-functional crisis team: Legal, Medical/Clinical, Regulatory Affairs, PR, Finance, and Board Secretary.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,851 words
As CEO, my overriding duty is to balance patient safety, legal/regulatory compliance, fiduciary responsibility, and long-term corporate survival. A 1-in-8,000 risk of liver failure is rare but severe, potentially fatal, and materially unexpected relative to the current label.
Read the full answer

Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)

You are writing an internal investment committee memo for a long/short equity fund. Company (fictional): LedgerLift (ticker: LLLT) – B2B…

MiniMax M1929 words
Investment Committee Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT) Recommendation & Price Target Recommendation: LONG 12-month Price Target Range: $65-82 (41-78% upside) Thesis: LedgerLift demonstrates superior SaaS unit economics with 123% NRR and 18-month CAC payback in an attractive B2B spend management category, where the company's 82%…
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,052 words
INTERNAL MEMO – INVESTMENT COMMITTEE TO: IC Members FROM: Long/Short Equity Desk DATE: Oct 2024 SUBJECT: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Initiation / Long Recommendation & Thesis Recommendation: LONG 12-Month PT Range: $52–$58 (Base case ~$54, Bull ~$68, Bear ~$38) Thesis: LedgerLift is a structurally advantaged mid-market AP…
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

MiniMax M1438 words
Weak Claim 1: "MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it." (Slide 1) Why Weak: Current non-invasive BCI technology (e.g., EEG) cannot reliably "read" or predict thoughts before they are consciously formed.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,009 words
Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, along with an analysis of why they undermine credibility and specific recommendations for improvement. The Technical Performance Claim Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy...
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
MiniMax M1
MiniMax M1
Solar Pro 4
Solar Pro 4Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, MiniMax M1 has the edge: bigger model tier, bigger context window.

Solar Pro 4 costs 4.6x less per token.

Too close to call
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

MiniMax M1
Input
$0.30
Output
$1.65
Solar Pro 4
Input
$0.09
3.3× cheaper
Output
$0.36
4.6× cheaper

Solar Pro 4 is cheaper on both: 3.3× input, 4.6× output.

Where to run it

3 hosts, cheapest first

MiniMax M12 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
MiniMax$0.40 in·$2.20 out·1M·99.9% upNNovitabf16$0.55 in·$2.20 out·1M·100% up
Solar Pro 41 host
HostInOutContextUptime
UUpstage$0.09 in·$0.36 out·524k·99.7% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

MiniMax M1 is developed by MiniMax while Solar Pro 4 is developed by Upstage. MiniMax M1 has a 1.0M token context window vs Solar Pro 4's 524K. You can compare their actual outputs across 14 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. MiniMax M1 and Solar Pro 4 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 14 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

MiniMax M1 costs $0.3/M input tokens and Solar Pro 4 costs $0.09/M input tokens. Solar Pro 4 is $0.21/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of MiniMax M1 and Solar Pro 4 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

MiniMax M1 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
MiniMax M1 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoHy3 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
MiniMax M1 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
MiniMax M1 vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
MiniMax M1 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
MiniMax M1 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoGLM 5.3 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
MiniMax M1 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
MiniMax M1 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
Solar Pro 4 vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

MiniMax M1 logoMiniMax M2.5 logo
MiniMax M1 vs MiniMax M2.5Version compare
MiniMax M1 logoMiniMax M3 logo
MiniMax M1 vs MiniMax M3Version compare
Solar Pro 4 logoSolar Pro 3 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Solar Pro 3Same lab
Solar Pro 4 logoOx Alpha logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Ox AlphaSame size
Solar Pro 4 logoGemini 3.8 Flash logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Gemini 3.8 FlashSame size
Solar Pro 4 logoGemini Pro 1.0 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Gemini Pro 1.0Same size
Solar Pro 4 logoGemma 3 12B logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Gemma 3 12BSame size
Solar Pro 4 logoGemma 3 27B logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Gemma 3 27BNew provider

Model pages

MiniMax M1 logo
MiniMax M158 outputs, specs and price
Solar Pro 4 logo
Solar Pro 414 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed