Model comparison

Llama 3.2 1B vs Mistral Small 3.2

Mistral Small 3.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 30.8 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Small 3.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 5 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.2 1B

Summary

They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Mistral Small 3.2 in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mistral Small 3.2 leads 45.1 to 21.4.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.6% for Llama 3.2 1B and 30.3% for Mistral Small 3.2.
Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.0938 / $0.25 for Mistral Small 3.2.
Mistral Small 3.2 accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 60K.

Side by side

Llama 3.2 1B and Mistral Small 3.2 specifications
	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
Provider	Meta	Mistral AI
Noometry Index	19.9	30.8
Released	2024-09-24	2025-06-20
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	60K	256K
Max output	54K	16K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.027	$0.0938
Output $ / M tokens	$0.20	$0.25
Results tracked	22	6

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
BigCodeBench Instruct	8.2%	—
LMArena Coding	1071	—
BigCodeBench Complete	11.3%	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	10.8%	—
BALROG	6.6%	—

Reasoning Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304), Mistral Small 3.2: 17.5 (#282)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
Chess Puzzles	0%	1%
Epoch Capabilities Index	101.95	131.73
Kagi LLM Benchmark	—	40.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1044	—

Math Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308), Mistral Small 3.2: 24.9 (#251)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	0.6%	30.3%
LMArena Math	1086	—

Knowledge Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307), Mistral Small 3.2: 26.8 (#249)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
GPQA Diamond	23.9%	49.1%
LMArena Expert	1007	—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Non-English	973	—
LMArena Chinese	958	—
LMArena German	1014	—
LMArena Russian	941	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Instruction Following	1031	—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269), Mistral Small 3.2: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
LMArena Longer Query	1050	—

Writing & Preference Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305), Mistral Small 3.2: 45.1 (#219)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Llama 3.2 1B	Mistral Small 3.2
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	200	1255
LMArena Text	1055	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1033	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	1030	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Mistral Small 3.2?

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Mistral Small 3.2?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 3.2 lists at $0.0938 and $0.25.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Small 3.2 does, with 256K tokens against 60K.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Mistral Small 3.2 share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Small 3.2 has 6.