Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Minimax
Minimax
vs
Mistral AI
Mistral AI

MiniMax M2.7 vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

OpenClaw

Deploy OpenClaw in Under 1 Minute We handle hosting, scaling, and maintenance

Key Takeaways

MiniMax M2.7 wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding

Mistral Small 3.1 24B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision
Price Advantage
Mistral Small 3.1 24B
Benchmark Advantage
MiniMax M2.7
Context Window
MiniMax M2.7
Speed
Mistral Small 3.1 24B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMiniMax M2.7Mistral Small 3.1 24B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMiniMax M2.7Mistral Small 3.1 24B
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorMinimaxMistral AI
ReleasedMar 2026Mar 2025

MiniMax M2.7 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Mistral Small 3.1 24B Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare MiniMax M2.7 with:

Compare Mistral Small 3.1 24B with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Mistral Small 3.1 24B has cheaper input pricing at $0.03/M tokens. Mistral Small 3.1 24B has cheaper output pricing at $0.11/M tokens.
MiniMax M2.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 41.9, compared to Mistral Small 3.1 24B's score of 13.9.
MiniMax M2.7 has a 204,800 token context window, while Mistral Small 3.1 24B has a 128,000 token context window.
MiniMax M2.7 does not support vision. Mistral Small 3.1 24B supports vision.