Model comparison
GPT-4o mini vs Mistral Medium 3.1
Mistral Medium 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.5 to 25.4 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Medium 3.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. GPT-4o mini scores higher in 0 categories and Mistral Medium 3.1 in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mistral Medium 3.1 leads 55.6 to 39.7.
- GPT-4o mini is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2 for Mistral Medium 3.1.
- Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 25.4 | 31.5 |
| Released | 2024-07-18 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Max output | 16K | 105K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $2 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 21.6 (#330), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 3.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 11.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 43.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1290 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.4% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 83.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 72.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 27.2 (#95), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 17.4% | — |
Reasoning Mistral Medium 3.1 leads
GPT-4o mini: 8.7 (#343), Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.1 (#336)
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| SimpleBench | 10.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 6.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 20.3% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 32.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1267 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 12% | — |
| DTBench | 54.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 50% | — |
| LMCA | 10.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 126.56 | — |
| LiveBench | 41.3% | — |
| PIQA | 88.7% | — |
Math Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 9.9 (#307), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 0.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 6.9% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 28% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 36.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1267 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 52.6% | — |
| GSM8K | 91.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 17.7 (#279), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 37.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 8.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 60.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 37.2% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 36.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1235 | — |
| BoolQ | 88.7% | — |
| MMLU | 81.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 25.3 (#117), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1066 | — |
| Video-MME | 64.8% | — |
| GeoBench | 64% | — |
| VPCT | 34% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 42.2 (#194), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1266 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1264 | — |
| LMArena French | 1296 | — |
| LMArena German | 1272 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1216 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1195 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1275 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1276 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 62.1 (#234), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 56.8% | — |
| IFEval | 78.2% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1259 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-4o mini: 39.1 (#181), Mistral Medium 3.1: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1289 | — |
Writing & Preference Mistral Medium 3.1 leads
GPT-4o mini: 39.7 (#243), Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.6 (#140)
| Benchmark | GPT-4o mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 873 | 1476 |
| LMArena Text | 1286 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1268 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 67.2% | — |
| WildBench | 79.1% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1285 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 28.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4o mini better than Mistral Medium 3.1?
Mistral Medium 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.5 to 25.4 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4o mini costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Medium 3.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4o mini or Mistral Medium 3.1?
GPT-4o mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 lists at $0.40 and $2.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mistral Medium 3.1 does, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4o mini and Mistral Medium 3.1 share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. GPT-4o mini has 60 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3.