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

Mistral Small 3.1 24B vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

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

Mistral Small 3.1 24B wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
Price Advantage
Mistral Small 3.1 24B
Benchmark Advantage
Mistral Small 3.1 24B
Context Window
Mistral Small 3.1 24B
Speed
Mistral Small 3.1 24B

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureMistral Small 3.1 24BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyMistral Small 3.1 24BQwen2.5 7B Instruct
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorMistral AIQwen
ReleasedMar 2025Oct 2024

Mistral Small 3.1 24B Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Mistral Small 3.1 24B with:

Compare Qwen2.5 7B Instruct with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Mistral Small 3.1 24B has cheaper input pricing at $0.03/M tokens. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.10/M tokens.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 13.9, compared to Qwen2.5 7B Instruct's score of N/A.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B has a 128,000 token context window, while Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has a 32,768 token context window.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B supports vision. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct does not support vision.