Model comparison
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Magistral Small
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads 22.1 to 6.8.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 30.2 |
| Released | — | 2025-06-10 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 40K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.50 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Magistral Small leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), Magistral Small: 38.4 (#176)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 35.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1186 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 27.1% | — |
Reasoning Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Magistral Small: 6.8 (#350)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 6.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1145 | — |
| DTBench | — | 61.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 133.19 |
Math Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Magistral Small: 26.2 (#261)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 30% |
| LMArena Math | 1152 | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Magistral Small: 30.9 (#223)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1142 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1099 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1145 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1092 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1131 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1162 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Magistral Small: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 8b Instruct | Magistral Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1150 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1129 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1108 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Magistral Small?
Granite 3.1 8b Instruct is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 30.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Magistral Small better for coding?
Magistral Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.4 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Magistral Small share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Small has 10.