# Magistral Medium vs o1

> o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 9.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/magistral-medium-vs-o1
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Magistral Medium scores higher in 0 categories and o1 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where o1 leads 27.9 to 8.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 6.1% for Magistral Medium and 30.7% for o1.
- Magistral Medium is cheaper at $2 / $5 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- Magistral Medium accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
- Magistral Medium has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 35.2 | 40.9 |
| Rank | 227 | 143 |
| Context | 262K | 200K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $15 |
| Output $/M | $5 | $60 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161)
- o1: 46.1 (#70)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1319 | 1367 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| SciCode | 39.2% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 47.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Magistral Medium: —
- o1: 24.6 (#117)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |

## Reasoning

- Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348)
- o1: 27.9 (#111)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-1 | 6.1% | 30.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1267 | 1371 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| SimpleBench | — | 41.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 16.2% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 15% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| DTBench | — | 74.7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| LMCA | — | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 141.91 |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |

## Math

- Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189)
- o1: 36.1 (#175)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1250 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 14.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 73.3% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 9.3% |

## Knowledge

- Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202)
- o1: 41.5 (#110)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | 1361 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 76.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 11.7% |

## Multimodal

- Magistral Medium: —
- o1: 34.2 (#93)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |

## Multilingual

- Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224)
- o1: 48.6 (#142)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1232 | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1227 | 1394 |
| LMArena French | 1267 | 1344 |
| LMArena German | 1248 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | 1125 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1224 | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1271 | 1345 |

## Instruction Following

- Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211)
- o1: 74.8 (#86)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1254 | 1367 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |

## Long Context

- Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183)
- o1: 50.3 (#9)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1295 | 1378 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219)
- o1: 55.6 (#144)

| Benchmark | Magistral Medium | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1255 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1245 | 1348 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1275 | 1369 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 70.2% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |

## FAQ

### Is Magistral Medium better than o1?

o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 9.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Magistral Medium or o1?

Magistral Medium is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $5 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.

### Is Magistral Medium or o1 better for coding?

o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Magistral Medium does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do Magistral Medium and o1 share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Magistral Medium has 22 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.