+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Mistral NeMo Instruct vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct leads with 2.2% higher average benchmark score. Both models have similar pricing. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
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.
+
+
+
+
Microsoft
Phi-3.5 Mini was developed by Microsoft as a small language model designed to deliver impressive performance despite its compact size. Built with efficiency in mind, it demonstrates that capable language understanding and generation can be achieved with fewer parameters, making AI more accessible for edge and resource-constrained deployments.
1 month newer
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
2024-07-18
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Microsoft
2024-08-23
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.15
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.10($0.10 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 5 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Average Score:67.8%
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Average Score:70.0%(+2.2%)
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:67.8%
Providers:2
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Avg Score:70.0%(+2.2%)
Providers:1