Model comparison
Llama 3.2 1B vs Mistral Small 3.1
Mistral Small 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Small 3.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Mistral AISummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Mistral Small 3.1 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Mistral Small 3.1 leads 41.4 to 23.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 23.9% for Llama 3.2 1B and 41.9% for Mistral Small 3.1.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $0.56 for Mistral Small 3.1.
- Mistral Small 3.1 accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 60K.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 19.9 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | 2025-03-17 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 60K | 128K |
| Max output | 54K | 102K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.027 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.56 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 28 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333), Mistral Small 3.1: 37.7 (#175)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1071 | 1309 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142), Mistral Small 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |
Reasoning Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304), Mistral Small 3.1: 18.9 (#249)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1278 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.95 | 127.48 |
Math Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308), Mistral Small 3.1: 13.7 (#295)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | 3.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1261 |
| Omni-MATH | — | 24.8% |
Knowledge Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307), Mistral Small 3.1: 22.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | 41.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | 1258 |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 61% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 39.2% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: —, Mistral Small 3.1: 32.6 (#93)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1136 |
Multilingual Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287), Mistral Small 3.1: 41.4 (#204)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 958 | 1254 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | 1266 |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | 1263 |
| LMArena French | — | 1270 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1210 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1206 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1283 |
Instruction Following Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285), Mistral Small 3.1: 63.8 (#225)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1264 |
| IFEval | — | 75% |
Long Context Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269), Mistral Small 3.1: 39.5 (#172)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1300 |
Writing & Preference Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305), Mistral Small 3.1: 37.2 (#254)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1278 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1253 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | 761 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1270 |
| WildBench | — | 78.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Mistral Small 3.1?
Mistral Small 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Small 3.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Mistral Small 3.1?
Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 3.1 lists at $0.35 and $0.56.
Is Llama 3.2 1B or Mistral Small 3.1 better for coding?
Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 20.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mistral Small 3.1 does, with 128K tokens against 60K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Mistral Small 3.1 share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Small 3.1 has 28.