+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Jamba 1.5 Mini vs Mistral NeMo Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Jamba 1.5 Mini leads with 2.7% higher average benchmark score. Jamba 1.5 Mini offers 256.3K more tokens in context window than Mistral NeMo Instruct. Both models have similar pricing. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
AI21 Labs
Jamba 1.5 Mini was created as a more compact hybrid model, designed to bring the benefits of Jamba's architecture to resource-conscious deployments. Built to provide long-context capabilities with reduced computational requirements, it enables efficient processing of extended inputs in practical applications.
+
+
+
+
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.
1 month newer
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
2024-07-18
Jamba 1.5 Mini
AI21 Labs
2024-08-22
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Jamba 1.5 Mini
Input:$0.20
Output:$0.40
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.15($0.30 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Jamba 1.5 Mini
Average Score:61.9%(+2.7%)
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Average Score:59.2%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Jamba 1.5 Mini
2024-03-05
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Jamba 1.5 Mini
2 providers
Bedrock
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.3ms
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
+
+
+
+
Jamba 1.5 Mini
Avg Score:61.9%(+2.7%)
Providers:2
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Avg Score:59.2%
Providers:2