Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base vs Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct leads the LLM Stats Score 21.1 to 0.3. Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base is 3.2x cheaper per token.
Mistral AI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct leads the overall LLM Stats Score 21.1 to 0.3, ranking #195 overall.
On price, Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base is roughly 3.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct also accepts a larger context window (262,144 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
- cost matters — it's about 3.2x cheaper per token
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Mar 2025
Choose Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
- overall performance matters — it scores 21.1 and ranks #195 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Individual benchmarks
5 reported for Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base · 10 for Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instructdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base ($0.10/1M tokens) is 3.0x cheaper than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.3x cheaper than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct ($1.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is more expensive than Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct has 456.0B more parameters than Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base, making it 1900.0% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base's 128,000 tokens. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base is limited to 128,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct does not.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.
Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base was released on 2025-03-17, while Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct was released on 2025-01-31.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base is 2 months newer than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct.
Mar 17, 2025
1.5 years ago
1mo newerJan 31, 2025
1.6 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base is available from Mistral AI. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is available from DeepInfra.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base vs Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct.