Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Mistral Medium 3.5 vs GPT-5.5

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Verificato dal team di ricerca di GetInfoUsUltima verifica: October 2026Politica editoriale
Condividi
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 GPT-5.5: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Mistral Medium 3.5 di Mistral AI e GPT-5.5 di OpenAI sono due modelli di IA di riferimento. Mistral Medium 3.5 offre una finestra di contesto di 262.1K token a $0.40/$2.00 per milione di token, mentre GPT-5.5 mette a disposizione 1.05M token di contesto a $5.00/$30.00 per milione di token. Di seguito analizziamo benchmark, latenza e costi.

Confronto Diretto (VS)

Cambia e Confronta Qualsiasi Modello

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

Modello Base a Pesi Aperti

Mistral Medium 3.5 di Mistral AI è un modello di IA progettato per il self-hosting su infrastruttura privata, il fine-tuning e la piena sovranità dei dati, con finestra di contesto da 262K, velocità di 90 token/s, indice di intelligenza di

Intelligence Index55 / 100
Input Token:

$0.40 / 1M

Output Token:

$2.00 / 1M

Context Window:

262.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

54%

OpenAI

GPT-5.5

Modello Ammiraglia di Frontiera

GPT-5.5 di OpenAI è un modello di IA progettato per il ragionamento aziendale di frontiera, la programmazione avanzata e i carichi di produzione, con finestra di contesto da 1.1M, velocità di 112 token/s, indice di intelligenza di 84/100 e

Intelligence Index84 / 100
Input Token:

$5.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$30.00 / 1M

Context Window:

1.05M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

81%

Differenze Chiave a Colpo d’Occhio

  • Mistral Medium 3.5 is 13.8x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • GPT-5.5 has a larger context window (1M vs 262K tokens).
  • GPT-5.5 is faster at 112 tok/s vs 90 tok/s.
  • GPT-5.5 leads on SWE-bench coding (81.0% vs 54.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureMistral Medium 3.5GPT-5.5
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
5584
Provider
Mistral AIOpenAI
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.40 / 1M$5.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$2.00 / 1M$30.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.35 / 1M$4.35 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
262.1K tokens~393 A4 pages of text1.05M tokens~1,575 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
33K128K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
90 tok/s112 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
54%81%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
68%80%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.10 / 1M$0.50 / 1M

Chi vince in ogni categoria?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
GPT-5.5
+27.0% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Mistral Medium 3.5
13.8x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
GPT-5.5
+24% faster generation
Context
GPT-5.5
1.05M tokens window

Punteggi Benchmark Verificati

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

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

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

54%vs81%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

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

68%vs80%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

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

84.5%vs89.6%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

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

1370ptsvs1465pts
Humanity's Last Exam (Frontier Expert Knowledge)

Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.

N/Avs16.2%
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

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

46%vs57.5%
SciCode (Scientific Computing)

Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.

N/Avs52%
LiveCodeBench (Competitive Coding)

Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.

N/Avs78.5%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

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

78%vs94.8%
Long-Context Reasoning

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

85%vs87%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

90 tok/s vs112 tok/s

Latenza e Tempo di Risposta

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
GPT-5.51.18s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Mistral Medium 3.56.01s
GPT-5.55.64s

Simulatore Interattivo dei Costi Token

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
GPT-5.5 Monthly API Bill
$35.25 / month
$5/1M in · $30/1M out
Mistral Medium 3.5 saves approximately $32.70 / month (93%) under this workload.13.8x Savings

Mistral Medium 3.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Finestra di contesto da 262K con capacità massima di output fino a 33K token (SWE-bench Verified 54% · GPQA Diamond 68%)
  • Throughput elevato di 90 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 450 ms
  • Pesi aperti (Confidential (~80B MoE)) pronti per il self-hosting locale o su cloud privato tramite vLLM, SGLang o Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Richiede server GPU dedicati con sufficiente memoria VRAM per l’esecuzione locale a piena precisione
  • Nelle dimostrazioni scientifiche più estreme, i modelli di ragionamento pesante dedicati offrono maggiore profondità

GPT-5.5 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Finestra di contesto da 1.1M con capacità massima di output fino a 128K token (SWE-bench Verified 81% · GPQA Diamond 80%)
  • Throughput elevato di 112 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 1180 ms
  • Economia API competitiva ($5/$30 per 1M di token) con supporto per prompt caching, tool calling e output JSON strutturati
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Modello cloud proprietario chiuso; non consente il download locale dei pesi per l’esecuzione offline
  • Per volumi di traffico elevati in produzione si consiglia di attivare il prompt caching e la Batch API

Token Use & Task Economics

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

MetricMistral Medium 3.5GPT-5.5
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.38$3.90
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
38K64K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
18K37K

Specifiche Tecniche

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureMistral Medium 3.5GPT-5.5
Official API Model ID (SDK)mistral-medium-3-5-latestgpt-5-5
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIOpenAI Responses API & Chat Completions v1
Release Date2026-042026-04
Knowledge CutoffFebruary 2026December 2025
ArchitectureEnterprise Hybrid Reasoning MoEDefault frontier unified reasoning model
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 Cloud10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Flat rate ($0.4/1M in) across full 262K windowFlat rate ($5/1M in) across full 1050K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLCached input at $0.1/1M tokensAutomatic prefix caching at $0.5/1M (no extra cache-write fee)
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 tool + Hosted Code Interpreter & File Search RAG
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Direct Preference (DPO) & Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT)
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)OpenAI Preparedness Framework Audited & System Card Published
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 GPT-5.5: Risposte Rapide (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Mistral Medium 3.5 or GPT-5.5?

GPT-5.5 is more intelligent. It scores 84 compared with 55 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

GPT-5.5 is faster, generating 112 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 $4.35 (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 1.18s.

Which model has a larger context window?

GPT-5.5 has a larger context window, supporting 1.05M tokens compared with 262.1K tokens.

Verdetto

Sia Mistral Medium 3.5 (Ideale per il self-hosting su infrastruttura privata, il fine-tuning e la piena sovranità dei dati, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) sia GPT-5.5 (Ideale per il ragionamento aziendale di frontiera, la programmazione avanzata e i carichi di produzione, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) eccellono in produzione: GPT-5.5 guida nei benchmark di ragionamento e programmazione, GPT-5.5 garantisce una generazione più rapida e Mistral Medium 3.5 offre il miglior rapporto qualità-prezzo per carichi API elevati.

Domande Frequenti (FAQ)

Quale modello è migliore per coding e ragionamento, Mistral Medium 3.5 o GPT-5.5?+

Nell’indice di intelligenza composito e nei benchmark di programmazione prevale GPT-5.5. Consulta i punteggi SWE-bench e GPQA qui sopra per tutti i dettagli.

Qual è la differenza di prezzo API tra Mistral Medium 3.5 e GPT-5.5?+

Mistral Medium 3.5 costa $0.40 / $2.00 per milione di token di input/output, mentre GPT-5.5 costa $5.00 / $30.00. Nel costo combinato, Mistral Medium 3.5 risulta più economico.

Quale modello ha la finestra di contesto più ampia e la velocità maggiore?+

Mistral Medium 3.5 supporta 262.1K token di contesto contro 1.05M token di GPT-5.5, mentre GPT-5.5 offre una velocità di generazione superiore.

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.

Fonti ufficiali: Documentazione API ufficiale di Mistral AI e OpenAI, schede di sistema e benchmark indipendenti (2026).