# Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen Max

> Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Medium 3.1 costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mistral-medium-3-1-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen Max leads 24.1 to 10.1.
- Mistral Medium 3.1 is cheaper at $0.40 / $2 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 33K.

## Snapshot

| | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.5 | 34.4 |
| Rank | 260 | 226 |
| Context | 131K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $0.40 | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | $2 | $6.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Mistral Medium 3.1: —
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#288)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1288 |

## Reasoning

- Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.1 (#336)
- Qwen Max: 24.1 (#154)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 6.5% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 20.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1270 |

## Math

- Mistral Medium 3.1: —
- Qwen Max: 21.0 (#272)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1275 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |

## Knowledge

- Mistral Medium 3.1: —
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#222)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |

## Multilingual

- Mistral Medium 3.1: —
- Qwen Max: 42.0 (#197)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1329 |
| LMArena German | — | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- Mistral Medium 3.1: —
- Qwen Max: 66.7 (#203)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1262 |

## Long Context

- Mistral Medium 3.1: —
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#175)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1289 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.6 (#140)
- Qwen Max: 48.0 (#200)

| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1248 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1476 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1277 |

## FAQ

### Is Mistral Medium 3.1 better than Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.4 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Medium 3.1 costs 3.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Mistral Medium 3.1 or Qwen Max?

Mistral Medium 3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $2 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Medium 3.1 does, with 131K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Mistral Medium 3.1 and Qwen Max share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.