# Magistral Medium vs Mistral Small 3.2

> Magistral Medium is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.2 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 21× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Magistral Medium's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

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

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Magistral Medium scores higher in 3 categories and Mistral Small 3.2 in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Mistral Small 3.2 leads 18.1 to 8.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 16.2% for Magistral Medium and 40.4% for Mistral Small 3.2.
- Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.0938 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $5 for Magistral Medium.
- Magistral Medium accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 256K.

## Snapshot

| | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 35.2 | 31.2 |
| Rank | 227 | 280 |
| Context | 262K | 256K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.0938 |
| Output $/M | $5 | $0.25 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161)
- Mistral Small 3.2: —

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 39.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1319 | — |

## Reasoning

- Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348)
- Mistral Small 3.2: 18.1 (#287)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 16.2% | 40.4% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 6.1% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1267 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 131.74 |

## Math

- Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189)
- Mistral Small 3.2: 26.3 (#260)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 30.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1250 | — |

## Knowledge

- Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202)
- Mistral Small 3.2: 26.7 (#256)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 49.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | — |

## Multilingual

- Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224)
- Mistral Small 3.2: —

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1232 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1227 | — |
| LMArena French | 1267 | — |
| LMArena German | 1248 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1125 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1224 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1271 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211)
- Mistral Small 3.2: —

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1254 | — |

## Long Context

- Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183)
- Mistral Small 3.2: —

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1295 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219)
- Mistral Small 3.2: 45.0 (#224)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1255 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1245 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1255 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1275 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Magistral Medium better than Mistral Small 3.2?

Magistral Medium is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.2 to 31.2 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 21× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Magistral Medium's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Magistral Medium or Mistral Small 3.2?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0938 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; Magistral Medium lists at $2 and $5.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Magistral Medium does, with 262K tokens against 256K.

### How many benchmarks do Magistral Medium and Mistral Small 3.2 share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Magistral Medium has 22 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Small 3.2 has 6.