Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Geprüft vom GetInfoUs-ForschungsteamZuletzt geprüft: October 2026Redaktionelle Richtlinien
Teilen
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Mistral Medium 3.5 von Mistral AI und Claude Sonnet 5.5 von Anthropic gehören zu den führenden KI-Modellen. Mistral Medium 3.5 bietet ein Kontextfenster von 262.1K Tokens bei API-Preisen von $0.40/$2.00 pro 1M Tokens, während Claude Sonnet 5.5 1M Tokens Kontext zu $2.00/$10.00 pro 1M Tokens bereitstellt. Hier finden Sie den vollständigen Benchmark-, Latenz- und Kostenvergleich.

Direktvergleich (VS)

Beliebige Modelle wechseln & vergleichen

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Mistral AI

Mistral Medium 3.5

Open-Weights-Basismodell

Mistral Medium 3.5 von Mistral AI ist ein KI-Modell für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität mit 262K Kontextfenster, 90 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 55/100 und $0.4/$2 pro 1M Toke

Intelligence Index55 / 100
Input Token:

$0.40 / 1M

Output Token:

$2.00 / 1M

Context Window:

262.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

54%

Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 5.5

Frontier-Flaggschiff-Modell

Claude Sonnet 5.5 von Anthropic ist ein KI-Modell für anspruchsvolles Enterprise-Reasoning, Softwareentwicklung und produktive KI-Workflows mit 1M Kontextfenster, 105 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 78/100 und $2/$10 pro 1M T

Intelligence Index78 / 100
Input Token:

$2.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$10.00 / 1M

Context Window:

1M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

82.9%

Wichtigste Unterschiede auf einen Blick

  • Mistral Medium 3.5 is 4.8x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a larger context window (1M vs 262K tokens).
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster at 105 tok/s vs 90 tok/s.
  • Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (82.9% vs 54.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureMistral Medium 3.5Claude Sonnet 5.5
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
5578
Provider
Mistral AIAnthropic
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.40 / 1M$2.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$2.00 / 1M$10.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.35 / 1M$1.54 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
262.1K tokens~393 A4 pages of text1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
33K128K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
90 tok/s105 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
54%82.9%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
68%79.4%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.10 / 1M$0.20 / 1M

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Claude Sonnet 5.5
+28.9% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Mistral Medium 3.5
4.8x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Claude Sonnet 5.5
+17% faster generation
Context
Claude Sonnet 5.5
1M tokens window

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Mistral Medium 3.5Claude Sonnet 5.5
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

54%vs82.9%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

68%vs79.4%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

84.5%vs90.1%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1370ptsvs1490pts
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

46%vs58.9%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

78%vsN/A
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

85%vsN/A
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

90 tok/s vs105 tok/s

Latenz & Antwortzeit

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Mistral Medium 3.50.45s
Claude Sonnet 5.50.55s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Mistral Medium 3.56.01s
Claude Sonnet 5.55.31s

Interaktiver Token-Kosten-Simulator

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Mistral Medium 3.5 Monthly API Bill
$2.55 / month
$0.4/1M in · $2/1M out
Claude Sonnet 5.5 Monthly API Bill
$12.30 / month
$2/1M in · $10/1M out
Mistral Medium 3.5 saves approximately $9.75 / month (79%) under this workload.4.8x Savings

Mistral Medium 3.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 262K Kontextfenster und bis zu 33K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 54% · GPQA Diamond 68%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 90 Token/Sekunde bei nur 450 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Offene Modellgewichte (Confidential (~80B MoE)) für lokales Self-Hosting und Fine-Tuning über vLLM, SGLang oder Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Erfordert dedizierte GPU-Hardware mit ausreichend VRAM für den lokalen Betrieb in voller Präzision
  • Bei extrem komplexen mehrstufigen Forschungsfragen bieten schwere Reasoning-Spezialmodelle noch tiefere Analysen

Claude Sonnet 5.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 1M Kontextfenster und bis zu 128K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 82.9% · GPQA Diamond 79.4%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 105 Token/Sekunde bei nur 550 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Effiziente API-Struktur ($2/$10 pro 1M Token) inklusive Prompt-Caching, Tool-Calling und strikter JSON-Ausgabe
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Proprietäres Cloud-Modell ohne Möglichkeit zum lokalen Download der Modellgewichte
  • Bei hohem Anfragevolumen empfiehlt sich der Einsatz von Prompt-Caching und Batch-API zur Kostenoptimierung

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricMistral Medium 3.5Claude Sonnet 5.5
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.38$3.29
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
38K72K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
18K37K

Technische Spezifikationen

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureMistral Medium 3.5Claude Sonnet 5.5
Official API Model ID (SDK)mistral-medium-3-5-latestclaude-sonnet-5-5-20260901
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIAnthropic Messages API + AWS Bedrock + Vertex AI
Release Date2026-042026-09
Knowledge CutoffFebruary 2026June 2026
ArchitectureEnterprise Hybrid Reasoning MoEAdaptive Frontier Multimodal Transformer
ParametersConfidential (~80B MoE)Confidential
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud4,000 – 10,000 RPM (Tier 4 + Priority Tier) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Flat rate ($0.4/1M in) across full 262K windowStandard rate up to 200K tokens; 2x input/output tier above 200K tokens
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLCached input at $0.1/1M tokens$0.2/1M cached read (90% off); 5-min default & 1-hour extended TTL
Computer Use / GUI AgentAPI / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox toolsNative Web Search Citations + Code Execution Tool + MCP Connectors
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Custom Model Tuning via Amazon Bedrock & Prompt Distillation
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 50 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 172 GB VRAM (Native BF16)Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)Anthropic RSP ASL-2 / ASL-3 Constitutional Safety Evaluated
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 ControlSOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Mistral Medium 3.5 or Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is more intelligent. It scores 78 compared with 55 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is faster, generating 105 tokens per second compared with 90 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Mistral Medium 3.5 is cheaper at $0.35 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $1.54 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Mistral Medium 3.5 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.45s compared with 0.55s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a larger context window, supporting 1M tokens compared with 262.1K tokens.

Fazit

Sowohl Mistral Medium 3.5 (Optimal für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) als auch Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Optimal für anspruchsvolles Enterprise-Reasoning, Softwareentwicklung und produktive KI-Workflows, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) überzeugen im Produktionseinsatz: Claude Sonnet 5.5 führt bei komplexem Reasoning und Coding, Claude Sonnet 5.5 liefert den höheren Token-Durchsatz und Mistral Medium 3.5 ist die kosteneffizienteste Wahl für große API-Workloads.

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Welches Modell ist besser für Coding und Reasoning – Mistral Medium 3.5 oder Claude Sonnet 5.5?+

Im Gesamt-Intelligenzindex und bei Software-Benchmarks liegt Claude Sonnet 5.5 vorn. Prüfen Sie oben die SWE-bench- und GPQA-Werte für Ihren Anwendungsfall.

Wie unterscheiden sich die API-Preise von Mistral Medium 3.5 und Claude Sonnet 5.5?+

Mistral Medium 3.5 kostet $0.40 / $2.00 pro 1M Input-/Output-Tokens, Claude Sonnet 5.5 liegt bei $2.00 / $10.00. Beim gewichteten Gesamtpreis ist Mistral Medium 3.5 günstiger.

Welches Modell hat das größere Kontextfenster und die höhere Geschwindigkeit?+

Mistral Medium 3.5 bietet 262.1K Tokens Kontext gegenüber 1M Tokens bei Claude Sonnet 5.5. Bei der Generierungsgeschwindigkeit liegt Claude Sonnet 5.5 vorn.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

Offizielle Quellen: Offizielle API-Dokumentation von Mistral AI und Anthropic, Systemkarten und unabhängige Benchmark-Auswertungen (2026).