# Llama 3.2 1B vs Mistral Medium 3.1

> Mistral Medium 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.9 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Medium 3.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-1b-vs-mistral-medium-3-1
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 1 category and Mistral Medium 3.1 in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mistral Medium 3.1 leads 55.5 to 21.3.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2 for Mistral Medium 3.1.
- Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 60K.
- Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 31.9 |
| Rank | 354 | 266 |
| Context | 60K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.027 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.20 | $2 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 6.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 20.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | — |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1086 | — |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | — |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | — |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | — |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)
- Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | 1476 |
| LMArena Text | 1055 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Mistral Medium 3.1?

Mistral Medium 3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.9 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Mistral Medium 3.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or Mistral Medium 3.1?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 lists at $0.40 and $2.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Medium 3.1 does, with 131K tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Mistral Medium 3.1 share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3.