Model comparison
Grok 4.6 vs Mistral Small 3.1
Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.1 costs 7.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.6 scores higher in 9 categories and Mistral Small 3.1 in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Grok 4.6 leads 66.8 to 13.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 99.2% for Grok 4.6 and 3.9% for Mistral Small 3.1.
- Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper at $0.35 / $0.56 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.6.
- Grok 4.6 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 128K.
- Mistral Small 3.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 56.8 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2026-08-12 | 2025-03-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 500K | 128K |
| Max output | 500K | 102K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | $0.56 |
| Results tracked | 49 | 28 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 58.0 (#14), Mistral Small 3.1: 37.7 (#175)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1464 | 1309 |
| DeepSWE | 67.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 48% | — |
| CursorBench | 41.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 25.3% | — |
| SciCode | 56.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 67.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,508 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.6: 39.4 (#25), Mistral Small 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 65.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 17.2% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,047 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 61.3 (#18), Mistral Small 3.1: 18.9 (#249)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 40% | 1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1445 | 1278 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.48 | 127.48 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 67.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 75.9% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 87.5% | — |
| CritPt | 19.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 30.5% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| DTBench | 97.3% | — |
| LMCA | 48.5% | — |
Math Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 66.8 (#19), Mistral Small 3.1: 13.7 (#295)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 99.2% | 3.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1416 | 1261 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 66% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| ProofBench | 51% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 24.8% |
Knowledge Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 63.3 (#18), Mistral Small 3.1: 22.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94% | 41.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1463 | 1258 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 49.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 61% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 39.2% |
Multimodal Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 43.9 (#18), Mistral Small 3.1: 32.6 (#93)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1265 | 1136 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 33.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 40% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1452 | — |
Multilingual Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 53.3 (#67), Mistral Small 3.1: 41.4 (#204)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1422 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1479 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1458 | 1270 |
| LMArena German | 1425 | 1266 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1383 | 1210 |
| LMArena Korean | 1395 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 1263 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1408 | 1283 |
Instruction Following Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 75.6 (#59), Mistral Small 3.1: 63.8 (#225)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1431 | 1264 |
| IFEval | — | 75% |
Long Context Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 44.4 (#62), Mistral Small 3.1: 39.5 (#172)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1453 | 1300 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.6 leads
Grok 4.6: 62.5 (#77), Mistral Small 3.1: 37.2 (#254)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.6 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1427 | 1278 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1430 | 1253 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1422 | 1270 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 761 |
| WildBench | — | 78.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.6 better than Mistral Small 3.1?
Grok 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.1 costs 7.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6 or Mistral Small 3.1?
Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $0.56 per million output tokens; Grok 4.6 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Grok 4.6 or Mistral Small 3.1 better for coding?
Grok 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.6 does, with 500K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.6 and Mistral Small 3.1 share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.6 has 49 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Small 3.1 has 28.