+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct vs Pixtral-12B
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Pixtral-12B leads with 3.0% higher average benchmark score. Phi-3.5-mini-instruct offers 119.8K more tokens in context window than Pixtral-12B. Both models have similar pricing. Pixtral-12B supports multimodal inputs. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
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.
+
+
+
+
Mistral AI
Pixtral 12B was introduced as Mistral's multimodal vision-language model, designed to understand and reason about both images and text. Built with 12 billion parameters for integrated visual and textual processing, it extends Mistral's capabilities into multimodal applications.
25 days newer
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Microsoft
2024-08-23
Pixtral-12B
Mistral AI
2024-09-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.10($0.10 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
Pixtral-12B
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.15
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Average Score:60.1%
+
+
+
+
Pixtral-12B
Average Score:63.1%(+3.0%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
1 providers
Azure
Throughput: 23 tok/s
Latency: 0.52ms
+
+
+
+
Pixtral-12B
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Avg Score:60.1%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Pixtral-12B
Avg Score:63.1%(+3.0%)
Providers:1