Model comparison
Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen Max
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 31.9 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.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AI
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen Max leads 25.1 to 10.6.
- 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.
Side by side
| Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.9 | 34.7 |
| Released | — | 2024-04-03 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 33K |
| Max output | 105K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $1.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2 | $6.40 |
| Results tracked | 3 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1288 |
Reasoning Qwen Max leads
Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341), Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 6.5% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 20.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1269 |
Math Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)
| 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 Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1254 |
| LMArena French | — | 1330 |
| LMArena German | — | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1290 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1262 |
Long Context Not comparable
Mistral Medium 3.1: —, Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1288 |
Writing & Preference Mistral Medium 3.1 leads
Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145), Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1248 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1476 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1277 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mistral Medium 3.1 better than Qwen Max?
Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 31.9 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.