Model comparison
GLM-4.6 vs Mistral Medium 3.1
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 2 categories and Mistral Medium 3.1 in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-4.6 leads 23.7 to 10.6.
- Mistral Medium 3.1 is cheaper at $0.40 / $2 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
- GLM-4.6 accepts more context: 205K tokens versus 131K.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 31.9 |
| Released | 2025-09-30 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 205K | 131K |
| Max output | 131K | 105K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.20 | $2 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 55.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1340 | — |
| SciCode | 38.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1449 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 340.82 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 24.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.4% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.6 leads
GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172), Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 47.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 6.5% |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 20.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1440 | — |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1432 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 3.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1431 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1426 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1499 | — |
| LMArena French | 1459 | — |
| LMArena German | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1393 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1419 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1436 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1410 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | — |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6 leads
GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90), Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1411 | 1476 |
| LMArena Text | 1440 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1427 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6 better than Mistral Medium 3.1?
GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or Mistral Medium 3.1?
Mistral Medium 3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $2 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-4.6 does, with 205K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Mistral Medium 3.1 share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3.