Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Mistral Small 3.2 vs Mistral Medium 3

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 Small 3.2 vs Mistral Medium 3: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Mistral Small 3.2 von Mistral AI und Mistral Medium 3 von Mistral AI gehören zu den führenden KI-Modellen. Mistral Small 3.2 bietet ein Kontextfenster von 128K Tokens bei API-Preisen von $0.10/$0.30 pro 1M Tokens, während Mistral Medium 3 131.1K Tokens Kontext zu $0.40/$2.00 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 Small 3.2

Open-Weights-Basismodell

Mistral Small 3.2 von Mistral AI ist ein KI-Modell für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität mit 128K Kontextfenster, 100 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 43/100 und $0.1/$0.3 pro 1M To

Intelligence Index43 / 100
Input Token:

$0.10 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.30 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

34%

Mistral AI

Mistral Medium 3

Open-Weights-Basismodell

Mistral Medium 3 von Mistral AI ist ein KI-Modell für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität mit 131K Kontextfenster, 85 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 47/100 und $0.4/$2 pro 1M Token.

Intelligence Index47 / 100
Input Token:

$0.40 / 1M

Output Token:

$2.00 / 1M

Context Window:

131.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

40.5%

Wichtigste Unterschiede auf einen Blick

  • Mistral Small 3.2 is 5.2x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Mistral Medium 3 has a larger context window (131K vs 128K tokens).
  • Mistral Small 3.2 is faster at 100 tok/s vs 85 tok/s.
  • Mistral Medium 3 leads on SWE-bench coding (40.5% vs 34.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureMistral Small 3.2Mistral Medium 3
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
4347
Provider
Mistral AIMistral AI
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.10 / 1M$0.40 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.30 / 1M$2.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.09 / 1M$0.35 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text131.1K tokens~197 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
8K16K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
100 tok/s85 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
34%40.5%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
48.5%57.5%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.05 / 1M$0.10 / 1M

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Mistral Medium 3
+6.5% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Mistral Small 3.2
5.2x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Mistral Small 3.2
+18% faster generation
Context
Mistral Medium 3
131.1K tokens window

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

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

Mistral Small 3.2Mistral Medium 3
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

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

34%vs40.5%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

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

48.5%vs57.5%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

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

72.5%vs79.5%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

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

1255ptsvs1310pts
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

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

29%vs36%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

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

55%vs68%
Long-Context Reasoning

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

68%vs77%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

100 tok/s vs85 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 Small 3.20.40s
Mistral Medium 30.48s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Mistral Small 3.25.40s
Mistral Medium 36.36s

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 Small 3.2 Monthly API Bill
$0.50 / month
$0.1/1M in · $0.3/1M out
Mistral Medium 3 Monthly API Bill
$2.55 / month
$0.4/1M in · $2/1M out
Mistral Small 3.2 saves approximately $2.06 / month (81%) under this workload.5.2x Savings

Mistral Small 3.2 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 128K Kontextfenster und bis zu 8K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 34% · GPQA Diamond 48.5%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 100 Token/Sekunde bei nur 400 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Offene Modellgewichte (24B) 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

Mistral Medium 3 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • 131K Kontextfenster und bis zu 16K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 40.5% · GPQA Diamond 57.5%)
  • Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 85 Token/Sekunde bei nur 480 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
  • Offene Modellgewichte (Confidential (~70B)) 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

Token Use & Task Economics

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

MetricMistral Small 3.2Mistral Medium 3
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.09$0.35
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
25K35K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

Technische Spezifikationen

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureMistral Small 3.2Mistral Medium 3
Official API Model ID (SDK)mistral-small-3-2-latestmistral-medium-3-latest
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2025-062025-05
Knowledge CutoffApril 2025March 2025
ArchitectureCompact Vision-Language TransformerEnterprise Multimodal Transformer
Parameters24BConfidential (~70B)
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Flat rate ($0.1/1M in) across full 128K windowFlat rate ($0.4/1M in) across full 131K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLCached input at $0.05/1M tokensCached input at $0.1/1M tokens
Computer Use / GUI AgentAPI / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)
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 toolsSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
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) · 15 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 52 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 43 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 151 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

Mistral Small 3.2 vs Mistral Medium 3: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Mistral Small 3.2 or Mistral Medium 3?

Mistral Medium 3 is more intelligent. It scores 47 compared with 43 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Mistral Small 3.2 is faster, generating 100 tokens per second compared with 85 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.09 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $0.35 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Mistral Small 3.2 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.40s compared with 0.48s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Mistral Medium 3 has a larger context window, supporting 131.1K tokens compared with 128K tokens.

Fazit

Sowohl Mistral Small 3.2 (Optimal für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) als auch Mistral Medium 3 (Optimal für Self-Hosting im eigenen Rechenzentrum, Fine-Tuning und volle Datensouveränität, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) überzeugen im Produktionseinsatz: Mistral Medium 3 führt bei komplexem Reasoning und Coding, Mistral Small 3.2 liefert den höheren Token-Durchsatz und Mistral Small 3.2 ist die kosteneffizienteste Wahl für große API-Workloads.

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Welches Modell ist besser für Coding und Reasoning – Mistral Small 3.2 oder Mistral Medium 3?+

Im Gesamt-Intelligenzindex und bei Software-Benchmarks liegt Mistral Medium 3 vorn. Prüfen Sie oben die SWE-bench- und GPQA-Werte für Ihren Anwendungsfall.

Wie unterscheiden sich die API-Preise von Mistral Small 3.2 und Mistral Medium 3?+

Mistral Small 3.2 kostet $0.10 / $0.30 pro 1M Input-/Output-Tokens, Mistral Medium 3 liegt bei $0.40 / $2.00. Beim gewichteten Gesamtpreis ist Mistral Small 3.2 günstiger.

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

Mistral Small 3.2 bietet 128K Tokens Kontext gegenüber 131.1K Tokens bei Mistral Medium 3. Bei der Generierungsgeschwindigkeit liegt Mistral Small 3.2 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 Mistral AI, Systemkarten und unabhängige Benchmark-Auswertungen (2026).