Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo: The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, Qwen2.5 Turbo emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, Mistral Medium 3.1 remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo comparison will break down every critical metric to help you make the best decision.

Explore best-for scenarios•Let the AI Selector recommend next steps

Model Snapshot

Key decision metrics at a glance.

Mistral Medium 3.1

Mistral

Reasoning: 4
Coding: 2
Multimodal: 2
Long Context: 3
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.001
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 94.786tokens/sec

Qwen2.5 Turbo

Other

Reasoning: 6
Coding: 6
Multimodal: 1
Long Context: 2
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.000
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 69.199tokens/sec

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `Mistral Medium 3.1` vs `Qwen2.5 Turbo`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo debate, Mistral Medium 3.1 scores 40 against Qwen2.5 Turbo's 60. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

Mistral Medium 3.1300ms

Qwen2.5 Turbo300ms

Tokens per Second

Mistral Medium 3.194.786

Qwen2.5 Turbo69.199

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo

Power is only one part of the equation. This Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, Mistral Medium 3.1 would cost $0.001, whereas Qwen2.5 Turbo would cost $0.000. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo Battle for You?

Choose Mistral Medium 3.1 if...

Cost is a secondary concern to power in your Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo decision.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Your use case demands cutting-edge AI performance.

Choose Qwen2.5 Turbo if...

You need a highly responsive model for user-facing applications.

Your budget is a primary consideration in the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo choice.

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen2.5 Turbo Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/