Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Mistral AI
Mistral AI
vs
Qwen
Qwen

Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen3.5-27B

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

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

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Mistral Medium 3.1 wins:

  • Better at math

Qwen3.5-27B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
Qwen3.5-27B
Benchmark Advantage
Qwen3.5-27B
Context Window
Qwen3.5-27B
Speed
Qwen3.5-27B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3.5-27B
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3.5-27B
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorMistral AIQwen
ReleasedAug 2025Feb 2026

Mistral Medium 3.1 Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Qwen3.5-27B Modalities

Input
textimagevideo
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3.5-27B has cheaper input pricing at $0.20/M tokens. Qwen3.5-27B has cheaper output pricing at $0.90/M tokens.
Qwen3.5-27B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 33.4, compared to Mistral Medium 3.1's score of 18.3.
Mistral Medium 3.1 has a 131,072 token context window, while Qwen3.5-27B has a 262,144 token context window.
Mistral Medium 3.1 supports vision. Qwen3.5-27B supports vision.