Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) vs Mistral Medium 3.5
Which is better for the money: Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) by Google or Mistral Medium 3.5 by Mistral? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Mistral Medium 3.5 scores 5.3 points higher (14.2 vs 8.9) but costs 86× as much to run the benchmark ($1264 vs $14.7; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Mistral Medium 3.5 when you need intelligence above 8.9, and Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) when 8.9 is enough.
| Metric | Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.9 | 14.2 | +59.6% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 59.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.68 | $1,263.80 | +8509.0% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 86× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.75s | 17.96s | −68.9% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 68.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.02 / $0.10 | $1.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image |
Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): 59.6% more intelligence, 8509.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 68.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- Mistral Medium 3.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)Mistral Medium 3.5Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/mistral-medium-3-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/mistral-medium-3-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill