Model comparison
Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Ring-2.6-1T
Mistral Medium 3.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#151); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Ring-2.6-1T leads 25.3 to 16.6.
Side by side
| Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 39.6 | 36.3 |
| Released | — | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 210K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $7.50 | — |
| Results tracked | 22 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads
Mistral Medium 3.5: 35.7 (#208), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1263 | — |
| SciCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1461 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 432.57 |
Reasoning Ring-2.6-1T leads
Mistral Medium 3.5: 16.6 (#290), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 41.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 12.9% | — |
| CritPt | — | 3.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1436 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.42 | — |
Math Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.5: 36.4 (#113), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1432 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.5: 39.3 (#123), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1431 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.5: 37.6 (#64), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1222 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.5: 52.1 (#93), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1443 | — |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena German | 1453 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1387 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1396 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1406 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.5: 74.7 (#87), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.5: 43.2 (#101), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1414 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.5: 58.6 (#113), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1421 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1372 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 993 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1423 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mistral Medium 3.5 better than Ring-2.6-1T?
Mistral Medium 3.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#151); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Mistral Medium 3.5 or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 35.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mistral Medium 3.5 and Ring-2.6-1T share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Medium 3.5 has 22 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.