Llama 4 Maverick vs Mistral Large 3

Meta · US  |  Mistral · France · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Pick Mistral Large 3 for european data-residency option or strong multilingual performance. Choose Llama 4 Maverick if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Mistral Large 3 if you want a managed API.

Llama 4 Maverick (Meta, US) and Mistral Large 3 (Mistral, France) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Mistral Large 3 is france's frontier contender — strong multilingual model with European data residency. 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

SpecLlama 4 MaverickMistral Large 3
ProviderMeta (US) Mistral (France)
ReleasedApril 2025 2026
Context window1M (~1,500 pages) 256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)Open weight (self-host / free) $2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?Yes — self-hostable No — API only
Modalitiestext, image, code text, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Open weights, 1M context

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Strong image + text understanding

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Self-hostable

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

European data-residency option

Mistral Large 3

A core design strength of Mistral Large 3.

Strong multilingual performance

Mistral Large 3

A core design strength of Mistral Large 3.

Efficient inference

Mistral Large 3

A core design strength of Mistral Large 3.

Lowest cost at scale

Llama 4 Maverick

At Open weight (self-host / free), it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Largest single-prompt input

Llama 4 Maverick

Its 1M window is about 3.9× larger, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

Llama 4 Maverick

At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Mistral Large 3, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

Llama 4 Maverick

Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.

A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs

Llama 4 Maverick

Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Mistral Large 3 is API-only.

Anyone whose priority is open weights, 1m context

Llama 4 Maverick

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is european data-residency option

Mistral Large 3

That is its strongest area.

An enterprise with regional data-residency rules

Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Large 3

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

Llama 4 Maverick: where it fits

Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for open weights, 1M context, strong image + text understanding, self-hostable, and 400B MoE, 17B active.

Its trade-offs are real: needs serious hardware to self-host, and trails closed frontier on reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

Mistral Large 3: where it fits

France's frontier contender — strong multilingual model with European data residency. Released 2026 by Mistral, it is built for european data-residency option, strong multilingual performance, efficient inference, and function calling.

Its trade-offs: smaller context than US/China frontier, and less benchmark coverage. At $2 in / $6 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. Llama 4 Maverick gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Mistral Large 3 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 Llama 4 Maverick and Mistral Large 3 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 Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Large 3 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, Llama 4 Maverick leans toward open weights, 1m context while Mistral Large 3 leans toward european data-residency option, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Large 3?

Llama 4 Maverick is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Mistral Large 3 is API-metered at $2/$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?

Llama 4 Maverick — 1M vs 256K, about 3.9× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both Llama 4 Maverick and Mistral Large 3 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Llama 4 Maverick, Mistral Large 3 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, Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Large 3?

Mistral Large 3 — released 2026, about 10 months after Llama 4 Maverick.

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.