Model comparison
Mistral Small 3.2 vs Qwen3.6 Flash
Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Mistral Small 3.2 scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 42.1 to 26.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 30.3% for Mistral Small 3.2 and 84.4% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.0938 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.
- Mistral Small 3.2 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3.6 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.2 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-06-20 | 2026-04-27 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 1M |
| Max output | 16K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.0938 | $0.19 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.25 | $1.13 |
| Results tracked | 6 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Mistral Small 3.2: —, Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | — | 326.4 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Mistral Small 3.2: 18.1 (#287), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 1% | 20% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 131.74 | 143.26 |
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
| DTBench | — | 77.1% |
| LMCA | — | 31% |
Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Mistral Small 3.2: 26.3 (#260), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 30.3% | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads
Mistral Small 3.2: 26.7 (#256), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 49.1% | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 15.9% |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mistral Small 3.2: 45.0 (#224), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Mistral Small 3.2 | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1255 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mistral Small 3.2 better than Qwen3.6 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Mistral Small 3.2 or Qwen3.6 Flash?
Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0938 per million input tokens and $0.25 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 256K.
How many benchmarks do Mistral Small 3.2 and Qwen3.6 Flash share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small 3.2 has 6 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.