+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Mistral NeMo Instruct vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base leads with 9.9% higher average benchmark score. Both models have similar pricing. Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
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.
+
+
+
+
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.
8 months newer
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
2024-07-18
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Mistral AI
2025-03-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.15($0.10 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
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Average Score:70.9%
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Average Score:80.8%(+9.9%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
2 providers
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
Mistral AI
Throughput: 0.1 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Avg Score:70.9%
Providers:2
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Avg Score:80.8%(+9.9%)
Providers:1