Model comparison

Mistral Small 3.1 vs Qwen1.5-32B

Mistral Small 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Small 3.1 Mistral AI

31.4

Rank #263 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

30.0

Rank #288 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 30.5 to 13.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 41.9% for Mistral Small 3.1 and 30.7% for Qwen1.5-32B.

Side by side

Mistral Small 3.1 and Qwen1.5-32B specifications
Mistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.430.0
Released2025-03-172024-02-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output102K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.35—
Output $ / M tokens$0.56—
Results tracked2821

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

Category by category

Coding Mistral Small 3.1 leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 37.7 (#175), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Coding13091155
BigCodeBench Instruct—32.3%
BigCodeBench Complete—42%

Reasoning Qwen1.5-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 18.9 (#249), Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts12781131
Chess Puzzles1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index127.48—

Math Qwen1.5-32B leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 13.7 (#295), Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Math12611155
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20253.9%—
Omni-MATH24.8%—

Knowledge Mistral Small 3.1 leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 22.6 (#266), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
GPQA Diamond41.9%30.7%
LMArena Expert12581126
MMLU-Pro61%—
GPQA (HELM)39.2%—
MMLU—74.4%

Multimodal Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 32.6 (#93), Qwen1.5-32B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Vision1136—

Multilingual Mistral Small 3.1 leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 41.4 (#204), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Non-English12551106
LMArena Chinese12541176
LMArena French12701100
LMArena German12661058
LMArena Japanese12101027
LMArena Korean12061007
LMArena Russian12631073
LMArena Spanish12831089

Instruction Following Mistral Small 3.1 leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 63.8 (#225), Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Instruction Following12641116
IFEval75%—

Long Context Mistral Small 3.1 leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 39.5 (#172), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Longer Query13001146

Writing & Preference Mistral Small 3.1 leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 37.2 (#254), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen1.5-32B
LMArena Text12781137
LMArena Creative Writing12531083
LMArena Multi-Turn12701140
EQ-Bench Creative Writing761—
WildBench78.8%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Small 3.1 better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Mistral Small 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Mistral Small 3.1 or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 31.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Small 3.1 and Qwen1.5-32B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small 3.1 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper