Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview): The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, Magistral Small 1.2 remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) 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.

Magistral Small 1.2

Mistral

Reasoning: 8
Coding: 1
Multimodal: 2
Long Context: 3
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.001
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 182.755tokens/sec

Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview)

Other

Reasoning: 8
Coding: 2
Multimodal: 3
Long Context: 4
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.002
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 58.895tokens/sec

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `Magistral Small 1.2` vs `Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview)`.

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 Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) debate, Magistral Small 1.2 scores 80 against Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview)'s 80. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) comparison.

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

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

Magistral Small 1.2300ms

Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview)300ms

Tokens per Second

Magistral Small 1.2182.755

Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview)58.895

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview)

Power is only one part of the equation. This Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) 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, Magistral Small 1.2 would cost $0.001, whereas Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) would cost $0.003. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) Battle for You?

Choose Magistral Small 1.2 if...

Your top priority is raw performance and capability.

You need the most advanced reasoning capabilities available.

Your use case demands cutting-edge AI performance.

Choose Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) if...

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

You prioritize cost-effectiveness over maximum performance.

Your workload requires consistent, reliable performance.

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

Your Questions about the Magistral Small 1.2 vs Qwen3 Max Thinking (Preview) Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/