Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Pick Mistral Medium 3 for strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00 or general reasoning, coding and multimodal tasks. Choose Llama 4 Maverick if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Mistral Medium 3 if you want a managed API.
Llama 4 Maverick (Meta, US) and Mistral Medium 3 (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. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Mistral Medium 3 is mistral's mid-tier model at $0.40/$2.00 — efficient general capability with a 128K window, below the 1M-context frontier tier. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Cost model: Llama 4 Maverick ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Mistral Medium 3 is API-metered at $0.4/$2 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
Context window: Llama 4 Maverick holds 7.8× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 128K (~192 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Mistral Medium 3 is the newer model by about 32 days (released May 7, 2025), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-France matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
Llama 4 Maverick
Mistral Medium 3
Provider
Meta (US)
Mistral AI (France)
Released
April 2025
May 7, 2025
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
128K (~192 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$0.4/$2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Open weights, 1M context: Llama 4 Maverick — Its 1M window holds about 7.8× more than Mistral Medium 3's 128K in a single prompt.
Strong image + text understanding: Llama 4 Maverick — Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments — and it carries the larger 1M context.
Self-hostable: Llama 4 Maverick — Open weights make this possible at all — Mistral Medium 3 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00: Mistral Medium 3 — Mistral's mid-tier model at $0.40/$2.00 — efficient general capability with a 128K window, below the 1M-context frontier tier — and it is the newer of the two.
General reasoning, coding and multimodal tasks: Mistral Medium 3 — Llama 4 Maverick is comparatively weak here — trails closed frontier on reasoning
Efficient mid-tier deployment for production workloads: Mistral Medium 3 — Mistral Medium 3 lists efficient mid-tier deployment for production workloads among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Lowest cost at scale: Llama 4 Maverick — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Mistral Medium 3's $0.4/$2 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input: Llama 4 Maverick — Its 1M window is about 7.8× larger than Mistral Medium 3's 128K, 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 Medium 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 Medium 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 strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00: Mistral Medium 3 — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Medium 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 Medium 3: where it fits
Mistral's mid-tier model at $0.40/$2.00 — efficient general capability with a 128K window, below the 1M-context frontier tier. Released May 7, 2025 by Mistral AI, it is built for strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00, general reasoning, coding and multimodal tasks, efficient mid-tier deployment for production workloads, and text and image input.
Its trade-offs: a 128K context — smaller than the 1M-window flagships here, no published SWE-Bench Verified score, a mid-tier model, not a frontier reasoner, and proprietary, unlike Mistral's open-weight releases. At $0.4 in / $2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget 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 Medium 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.
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Medium 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 Medium 3 leans toward strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Medium 3?
Llama 4 Maverick is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Mistral Medium 3 is API-metered at $0.4/$2 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 128K, about 7.8× 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 Medium 3 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Llama 4 Maverick, Mistral Medium 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 Medium 3?
Mistral Medium 3 — released May 7, 2025, about 32 days after Llama 4 Maverick.
Llama 4 Maverick vs Mistral Medium 3
Meta · US | Mistral AI · France · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Pick Mistral Medium 3 for strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00 or general reasoning, coding and multimodal tasks. Choose Llama 4 Maverick if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Mistral Medium 3 if you want a managed API.
Llama 4 Maverick (Meta, US) and Mistral Medium 3 (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. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Mistral Medium 3 is mistral's mid-tier model at $0.40/$2.00 — efficient general capability with a 128K window, below the 1M-context frontier tier. 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
▸Cost model: Llama 4 Maverick ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Mistral Medium 3 is API-metered at $0.4/$2 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
▸Context window: Llama 4 Maverick holds 7.8× more — 1M (~1,500 pages) vs 128K (~192 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Mistral Medium 3 is the newer model by about 32 days (released May 7, 2025), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-France matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Llama 4 Maverick
Mistral Medium 3
Provider
Meta (US)
Mistral AI (France)
Released
April 2025
May 7, 2025
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
128K (~192 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$0.4/$2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Open weights, 1M context
Llama 4 Maverick
Its 1M window holds about 7.8× more than Mistral Medium 3's 128K in a single prompt.
Strong image + text understanding
Llama 4 Maverick
Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments — and it carries the larger 1M context.
Self-hostable
Llama 4 Maverick
Open weights make this possible at all — Mistral Medium 3 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00
Mistral Medium 3
Mistral's mid-tier model at $0.40/$2.00 — efficient general capability with a 128K window, below the 1M-context frontier tier — and it is the newer of the two.
General reasoning, coding and multimodal tasks
Mistral Medium 3
Llama 4 Maverick is comparatively weak here — trails closed frontier on reasoning
Efficient mid-tier deployment for production workloads
Mistral Medium 3
Mistral Medium 3 lists efficient mid-tier deployment for production workloads among its strengths; Llama 4 Maverick does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Llama 4 Maverick
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Mistral Medium 3's $0.4/$2 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
Llama 4 Maverick
Its 1M window is about 7.8× larger than Mistral Medium 3's 128K, 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 Medium 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 Medium 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 strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00
→ Mistral Medium 3
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Medium 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 Medium 3: where it fits
Mistral's mid-tier model at $0.40/$2.00 — efficient general capability with a 128K window, below the 1M-context frontier tier. Released May 7, 2025 by Mistral AI, it is built for strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00, general reasoning, coding and multimodal tasks, efficient mid-tier deployment for production workloads, and text and image input.
Its trade-offs: a 128K context — smaller than the 1M-window flagships here, no published SWE-Bench Verified score, a mid-tier model, not a frontier reasoner, and proprietary, unlike Mistral's open-weight releases. At $0.4 in / $2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget 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 Medium 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 Medium 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.
Is Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Medium 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 Medium 3 leans toward strong cost-to-capability at $0.40/$2.00, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick or Mistral Medium 3?
Llama 4 Maverick is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Mistral Medium 3 is API-metered at $0.4/$2 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 128K, about 7.8× 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 Medium 3 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Llama 4 Maverick, Mistral Medium 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 Medium 3?
Mistral Medium 3 — released May 7, 2025, about 32 days after Llama 4 Maverick.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.