| Signal | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) | Delta | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | +17 | |
Pricing | 30 | -- | |
Context window size | 81 | -5 | |
Recency | 67 | -32 | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -- | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 5 | 2 wins |
8
days ranked higher
4
days
18
days ranked higher
Mistral AI
Alibaba
| Metric | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 63 | 63 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) |
| Rank | #177 | #179 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) |
| Quality Rank | #177 | #179 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) |
| Adoption Rank | #177 | #179 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) |
| Parameters | 24B | 80B | -- |
| Context Window | 128K | 262K | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) |
| Pricing | Free | Free | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 50 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) |
| Pricing | 30 | 30 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) |
| Context window size | 81 | 86 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) |
| Recency | 67 | 99 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 20 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 63/100 (rank #177), placing it in the top 39% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 63/100 (rank #179), placing it in the top 39% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal — your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (262K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (63/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input — can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.10000000000000142 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free)
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free)
0% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free)
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free)
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free)
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Mistral AI
| Capability | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Mistral AI
Alibaba
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 128K | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | -- |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Mar 17, 2025 | Sep 11, 2025 |
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) scores 63/100 (rank #177) compared to Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free)'s 63/100 (rank #179), giving it a 0-point advantage. Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) is the stronger overall choice, though Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) may excel in specific areas like certain benchmarks.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) is ranked #177 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) is ranked #179 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) is cheaper at $0.00/M output tokens vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free)'s $0.00/M output tokens — a significant difference. Input token pricing: Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free) at $0.00/M vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) at $0.00/M.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct (free) has a larger context window of 262,144 tokens compared to Mistral Small 3.1 24B (free)'s 128,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.