Model comparison

Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 40.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 18 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Medium 3.5

Mistral AI

40.2

Rank #152 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash

Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Medium 3.5 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 33.7 to 17.3.
Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $7.50 for Mistral Medium 3.5.
Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
Mistral Medium 3.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Mistral Medium 3.5 and Qwen3.5-Flash specifications
	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
Provider	Mistral AI	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	40.2	42.5
Released	—	2026-02-23
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	262K	1M
Max output	210K	66K
Input $ / M tokens	$1.50	$0.10
Output $ / M tokens	$7.50	$0.40
Results tracked	22	32

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

Category by category

Coding Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 36.0 (#213), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena WebDev	1264	1244
LMArena Coding	1461	1412
ALE-Bench	—	221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.5: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2	—	462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 17.3 (#295), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts	1436	1403
Epoch Capabilities Index	141.35	143.98
Kagi LLM Benchmark	41.4%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	12.9%	—
Chess Puzzles	—	21%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	20%
DTBench	—	82.9%
LMCA	—	29.1%

Math Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 39.1 (#113), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math	1431	1407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	—	6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)	—	0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 40.0 (#126), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Expert	1432	1407
GPQA Diamond	—	82.3%
SimpleQA Verified	—	20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	10.5%

Multimodal Not comparable

Mistral Medium 3.5: 38.3 (#65), Qwen3.5-Flash: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Vision	1223	—

Multilingual Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 51.9 (#100), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English	1404	1385
LMArena Chinese	1442	1446
LMArena French	1448	1412
LMArena German	1451	1390
LMArena Korean	1385	1344
LMArena Russian	1395	1379
LMArena Spanish	1409	1400
LMArena Japanese	—	1368

Instruction Following Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

Mistral Medium 3.5: 74.6 (#90), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following	1415	1374

Long Context Too close to call

Mistral Medium 3.5: 43.2 (#103), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query	1415	1392

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Mistral Medium 3.5: 58.5 (#117), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Medium 3.5	Qwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text	1421	1397
LMArena Creative Writing	1374	1343
LMArena Multi-Turn	1423	1393
EQ-Bench 4	993	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Medium 3.5 better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 40.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.5 lists at $1.50 and $7.50.

Is Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Mistral Medium 3.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.0 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Medium 3.5 and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Medium 3.5 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.