Model comparison

Command R vs Mistral Medium 3.1

Command R and Mistral Medium 3.1 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.4 vs 31.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 0 shared benchmarks.

Command R

Cohere

31.4

Rank #272 Confirmed

Mistral Medium 3.1

Mistral AI

31.9

Rank #266 Reported

Summary

The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mistral Medium 3.1 leads 55.5 to 38.2.
Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2 for Mistral Medium 3.1.
Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command R and Mistral Medium 3.1 specifications
	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
Provider	Cohere	Mistral AI
Noometry Index	31.4	31.9
Released	2024-08-30	—
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	128K	131K
Max output	4K	105K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.15	$0.40
Output $ / M tokens	$0.60	$2
Results tracked	29	3

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Command R: 29.3 (#306), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
BigCodeBench Instruct	37.1%	—
LiveBench Coding	17.9%	—
LMArena Coding	1169	—
BigCodeBench Complete	45.2%	—

Reasoning Command R leads

Command R: 13.8 (#331), Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
NYT Connections (extended)	—	6.5%
Thematic Generalization	—	20.3%
LiveBench Reasoning	21.9%	—
LMArena Hard Prompts	1164	—
DTBench	46.4%	—
LiveBench Data Analysis	33.3%	—
LMCA	9.2%	—
LiveBench	27.5%	—

Math Not comparable

Command R: 28.0 (#246), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
LiveBench Math	19.4%	—
LMArena Math	1155	—

Knowledge Not comparable

Command R: 31.0 (#221), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Expert	1138	—
MMLU	65.2%	—

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R: 35.7 (#245), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Non-English	1174	—
LMArena Chinese	1182	—
LMArena French	1162	—
LMArena German	1176	—
LMArena Japanese	1143	—
LMArena Korean	1163	—
LMArena Russian	1174	—
LMArena Spanish	1151	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Command R: 58.1 (#261), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
LiveBench Instruction Following	55.6%	—
LMArena Instruction Following	1167	—

Long Context Not comparable

Command R: 36.3 (#231), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Longer Query	1198	—

Writing & Preference Mistral Medium 3.1 leads

Command R: 38.2 (#254), Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Command R	Mistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text	1187	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1170	—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	—	1476
LMArena Multi-Turn	1163	—
LiveBench Language	16.7%	—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R better than Mistral Medium 3.1?

Command R and Mistral Medium 3.1 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.4 vs 31.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Which is cheaper, Command R or Mistral Medium 3.1?

Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 lists at $0.40 and $2.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Medium 3.1 does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R and Mistral Medium 3.1 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3.