+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 4B vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base leads with 9.6% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3 4B offers 6.1K more tokens in context window than Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base. Both models have similar pricing. Overall, Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B was developed as a compact yet capable open-source model, designed to strike a balance between performance and resource efficiency. Built with 4 billion parameters and instruction tuning, it provides a practical option for applications requiring moderate capability with manageable computational costs.
+
+
+
+
Mistral AI
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base represents an updated iteration of the 24B foundation model, developed with architectural refinements and improved training. Built to provide enhanced base capabilities for fine-tuning, it incorporates learnings from previous versions for better downstream performance.
5 days newer
Gemma 3 4B
2025-03-12
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Mistral AI
2025-03-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Input:$0.02
Output:$0.04($0.34 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.30
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Average Score:37.2%
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Average Score:46.8%(+9.6%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Gemma 3 4B
2024-08-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 33 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Avg Score:37.2%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Avg Score:46.8%(+9.6%)
Providers:1