Model comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Mistral Small 3.1
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.1 costs 75× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 8 categories and Mistral Small 3.1 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4 leads 40.2 to 13.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 64.4% for Claude Opus 4 and 3.9% for Mistral Small 3.1.
- Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper at $0.35 / $0.56 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
- Claude Opus 4 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
- Mistral Small 3.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2025-03-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 128K |
| Max output | 32K | 102K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $0.56 |
| Results tracked | 56 | 28 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 47.8 (#55), Mistral Small 3.1: 37.7 (#175)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1309 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.7% | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4: 34.5 (#39), Mistral Small 3.1: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1127 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 27.4 (#104), Mistral Small 3.1: 18.9 (#249)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1278 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | 127.48 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 1% |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| DTBench | 81.6% | — |
| LMCA | 37.4% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 40.2 (#80), Mistral Small 3.1: 13.7 (#295)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | 3.9% |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | 24.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1391 | 1261 |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 43.9 (#82), Mistral Small 3.1: 22.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | 41.9% |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | 61% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | 39.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1384 | 1258 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
Multimodal Mistral Small 3.1 leads
Claude Opus 4: 30.9 (#101), Mistral Small 3.1: 32.6 (#93)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | 1136 |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 49.0 (#133), Mistral Small 3.1: 41.4 (#204)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1255 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1370 | 1270 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | 1266 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1332 | 1210 |
| LMArena Korean | 1318 | 1206 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1263 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1388 | 1283 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 77.3 (#26), Mistral Small 3.1: 63.8 (#225)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 91.8% | 75% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1264 |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude Opus 4: 39.5 (#167), Mistral Small 3.1: 39.5 (#172)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1300 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 61.4 (#85), Mistral Small 3.1: 37.2 (#254)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | Mistral Small 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1278 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1386 | 1253 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | 761 |
| WildBench | 85.2% | 78.8% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1270 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4 better than Mistral Small 3.1?
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.1 costs 75× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 or Mistral Small 3.1?
Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $0.56 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4 or Mistral Small 3.1 better for coding?
Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 4 does, with 200K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and Mistral Small 3.1 share?
27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Small 3.1 has 28.