Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Mistral
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 4 categories and Mistral in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads 30.8 to 16.6.
- Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 29.9 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Mistral: 33.8 (#250)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1162 |
Reasoning Too close to call
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Mistral: 22.2 (#200)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1149 |
Math Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Mistral: 22.3 (#278)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1180 |
| Omni-MATH | — | 7.2% |
Knowledge Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Mistral: 16.6 (#288)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1125 |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 27.7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 30.3% |
Multilingual Mistral leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Mistral: 32.8 (#254)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1129 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1109 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1168 |
| LMArena French | — | 1180 |
| LMArena German | — | 1155 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1013 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1032 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1143 |
Instruction Following Granite 3.1 2b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Mistral: 52.6 (#288)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1152 |
| IFEval | — | 56.8% |
Long Context Too close to call
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Mistral: 35.0 (#245)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1153 |
Writing & Preference Mistral leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Mistral: 37.0 (#260)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Mistral |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1165 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1158 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1147 |
| WildBench | — | 66% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Mistral?
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.2 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Mistral better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (33.4 vs 33.8); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Mistral share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Mistral has 22.