GPT-4o mini vs Mistral Medium 3.5

OpenAI · US  |  Mistral AI · France · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick GPT-4o mini for very low cost per token for its capability tier or strong coding for a small model (87.2% humaneval). Pick Mistral Medium 3.5 for strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier or 128b dense open-weight model — self-hostable. Choose Mistral Medium 3.5 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; GPT-4o mini if you want a managed API.

GPT-4o mini (OpenAI, US) and Mistral Medium 3.5 (Mistral AI, France) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. GPT-4o mini is openAI's budget small multimodal model — cheap, fast text-and-vision intelligence that outscored peer small models like Gemini 1.5 Flash and Claude 3 Haiku on MMLU and HumanEval at launch. Mistral Medium 3.5 is mistral's efficient 128B open-weight model — a single dense model unifying reasoning and coding that punches above its size on independent tests (AA Index 30). They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecGPT-4o miniMistral Medium 3.5
ProviderOpenAI (US) Mistral AI (France)
ReleasedJuly 18, 2024 April 29, 2026
Context window128K (~192 pages) 256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)$0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens $1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens
Open weight?No — API only Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, image text, image, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Very low cost per token for its capability tier

GPT-4o mini

At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Mistral Medium 3.5 ($1.5/$7.5 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.

Strong coding for a small model (87.2% HumanEval)

GPT-4o mini

OpenAI's budget small multimodal model — cheap, fast text-and-vision intelligence that outscored peer small models like Gemini 1.5 Flash and Claude 3 Haiku on MMLU and HumanEval at launch — and it runs cheaper at $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens.

Leading MMLU among peer small models (82%)

GPT-4o mini

GPT-4o mini lists leading MMLU among peer small models (82%) among its strengths; Mistral Medium 3.5 does not.

Strong intelligence-for-size — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 30, near the top of its price tier

Mistral Medium 3.5

Mistral's efficient 128B open-weight model — a single dense model unifying reasoning and coding that punches above its size on independent tests (AA Index 30) — and it carries the larger 256K context.

128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable

Mistral Medium 3.5

Open weights make this possible at all — GPT-4o mini is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.

Unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort

Mistral Medium 3.5

GPT-4o mini is comparatively weak here — weaker on hard reasoning and coding than frontier models

Lowest cost at scale

GPT-4o mini

At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Largest single-prompt input

Mistral Medium 3.5

Its 256K window is about 2× larger than GPT-4o mini's 128K, fitting roughly 384 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

GPT-4o mini

At $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Mistral Medium 3.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Mistral Medium 3.5

Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.

A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs

Mistral Medium 3.5

Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; GPT-4o mini is API-only.

Anyone whose priority is very low cost per token for its capability tier

GPT-4o mini

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier

Mistral Medium 3.5

That is its strongest area.

An enterprise with regional data-residency rules

GPT-4o mini or Mistral Medium 3.5

Origin (US vs France) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.

GPT-4o mini: where it fits

OpenAI's budget small multimodal model — cheap, fast text-and-vision intelligence that outscored peer small models like Gemini 1.5 Flash and Claude 3 Haiku on MMLU and HumanEval at launch. Released July 18, 2024 by OpenAI, it is built for very low cost per token for its capability tier, strong coding for a small model (87.2% HumanEval), leading MMLU among peer small models (82%), and text and image (vision) understanding in the API.

Its trade-offs are real: only 128K context with an October 2023 knowledge cutoff, and weaker on hard reasoning and coding than frontier models. At $0.15 in / $0.6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

Mistral Medium 3.5: where it fits

Mistral's efficient 128B open-weight model — a single dense model unifying reasoning and coding that punches above its size on independent tests (AA Index 30). Released April 29, 2026 by Mistral AI, it is built for strong intelligence-for-size — Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 30, near the top of its price tier, 128B dense open-weight model — self-hostable, unifies reasoning and coding into one model with an adjustable reasoning effort, and 256K context with text and image input.

Its trade-offs: below the absolute frontier — a value/efficiency pick, not a flagship-beater, output pricing ($7.50/M) is higher than the cheapest Chinese rivals, license framing ('open' vs enterprise) varies across sources — confirm terms for commercial use, and no native video or audio. At $1.5 in / $7.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

The defining split here is open vs. closed. Mistral Medium 3.5 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. GPT-4o mini gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.

Want both GPT-4o mini and Mistral Medium 3.5 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-4o mini or Mistral Medium 3.5 better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, GPT-4o mini leans toward very low cost per token for its capability tier while Mistral Medium 3.5 leans toward strong intelligence-for-size — artificial analysis intelligence index 30, near the top of its price tier, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o mini or Mistral Medium 3.5?

Mistral Medium 3.5 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while GPT-4o mini is API-metered at $0.15/$0.6 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mistral Medium 3.5 — 256K vs 128K, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both GPT-4o mini and Mistral Medium 3.5 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you GPT-4o mini, Mistral Medium 3.5 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, GPT-4o mini or Mistral Medium 3.5?

Mistral Medium 3.5 — released April 29, 2026, about 22 months after GPT-4o mini.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.