+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemini 1.5 Flash vs Mistral NeMo Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Gemini 1.5 Flash leads with 6.9% higher average benchmark score. Gemini 1.5 Flash offers 800.8K more tokens in context window than Mistral NeMo Instruct. Both models have similar pricing. Gemini 1.5 Flash supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Gemini 1.5 Flash is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash was created as a fast and efficient multimodal model, designed to provide quick responses while handling text, images, and other modalities. Built for applications requiring low latency and high throughput, it balances capability with speed to serve real-time and high-volume use cases.
+
+
+
+
Mistral AI
Mistral Nemo was developed as a mid-sized instruction-tuned model, designed to balance capability with efficiency for practical deployments. Built to serve as a versatile foundation for various applications, it provides reliable performance across general language understanding and generation tasks.
2 months newer
Gemini 1.5 Flash
2024-05-01
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
2024-07-18
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.60
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.15($0.45 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Average Score:82.7%(+6.9%)
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Average Score:75.8%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemini 1.5 Flash
2023-11-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
1 providers
Throughput: 150 tok/s
Latency: 0.3ms
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
+
+
+
+
Gemini 1.5 Flash
Avg Score:82.7%(+6.9%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Avg Score:75.8%
Providers:2