Model comparison

Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B

Qwen3-30B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Medium 3.1 Mistral AI

31.9

Rank #266 Reported

Qwen3-30B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

38.9

Rank #179 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3-30B-A3B leads 22.2 to 10.6.
  • Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2 for Mistral Medium 3.1.
  • Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 41K.
  • Qwen3-30B-A3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Mistral Medium 3.1 and Qwen3-30B-A3B specifications
Mistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.938.9
Released—2025-04-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window131K41K
Max output105K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.40$0.12
Output $ / M tokens$2$0.50
Results tracked332

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
SciCode—33.3%
WeirdML—29.8%
LMArena Coding—1416

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—41.4%

Reasoning Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
NYT Connections (extended)6.5%—
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—8%
Thematic Generalization20.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1398
DTBench—69.3%
LMCA—22.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—139.63

Math Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—47.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—70.3%
LMArena Math—1394

Knowledge Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
GPQA Diamond—70.1%
Confabulations—12.3%
LMArena Expert—1396

Multilingual Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Non-English—1372
LMArena Chinese—1433
LMArena French—1418
LMArena German—1380
LMArena Japanese—1337
LMArena Korean—1331
LMArena Russian—1370
LMArena Spanish—1404

Instruction Following Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following—1363

Long Context Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
Fiction.LiveBench—40.6%
LMArena Longer Query—1379

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Text—1384
LMArena Creative Writing—1317
Short-Story Creative Writing—75.3%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1476—
LMArena Multi-Turn—1378

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Medium 3.1 better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Medium 3.1 or Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 lists at $0.40 and $2.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Medium 3.1 does, with 131K tokens against 41K.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Medium 3.1 and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper