Noometry

Model comparison

Mistral Small 3.1 vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 31.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Small 3.1 Mistral AI

31.7

Rank #269 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #182 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Small 3.1 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 39.0 to 14.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 3.9% for Mistral Small 3.1 and 84.4% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
  • Both cost about the same: $0.35 input and $0.56 output per million tokens.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Mistral Small 3.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Mistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.738.8
Released2025-03-172026-04-27
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output102K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.35$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$0.56$1.13
Results tracked2813

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 38.3 (#179), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Coding1309—
ALE-Bench—326.4

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 19.7 (#254), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
Chess Puzzles1%20%
Epoch Capabilities Index127.48143.26
SimpleBench—35.2%
LMArena Hard Prompts1278—
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
DTBench—77.1%
LMCA—31%

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 14.7 (#301), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20253.9%84.4%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—22.5%
Omni-MATH24.8%—
LMArena Math1262—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Mistral Small 3.1: 22.6 (#271), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond41.9%83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—15.9%
MMLU-Pro61%—
GPQA (HELM)39.2%—
LMArena Expert1257—

Multimodal Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 33.2 (#99), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Vision1136—

Multilingual Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 41.2 (#209), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Non-English1255—
LMArena Chinese1253—
LMArena French1273—
LMArena German1266—
LMArena Japanese1208—
LMArena Korean1206—
LMArena Russian1263—
LMArena Spanish1283—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 63.6 (#230), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
IFEval75%—
LMArena Instruction Following1264—

Long Context Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 39.5 (#178), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1299—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.1: 37.0 (#259), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkMistral Small 3.1Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1277—
LMArena Creative Writing1253—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing761—
WildBench78.8%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1270—

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Small 3.1 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 31.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Small 3.1 or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $0.56 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash lists at $0.19 and $1.13.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Small 3.1 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small 3.1 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper