GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) vs Mistral Small 3.1
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) by OpenAI or Mistral Small 3.1 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
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) scores 31.3 points higher (38.4 vs 7.1) but costs 190× as much to run the benchmark ($5294 vs $27.8; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 7.1, and Mistral Small 3.1 when 7.1 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) | Mistral Small 3.1 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 38.4 | 7.1 | −81.5% Mistral Small 3.1 is 81.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,294.36 | $27.82 | −99.5% Mistral Small 3.1 is 99.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 44.96s | 11.99s | −73.3% Mistral Small 3.1 is 73.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $30.0 | $0.08 / $0.14 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Mistral Small 3.1 vs GPT-5.5 (Xhigh): 81.5% less intelligence, 99.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 73.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- Mistral Small 3.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)Mistral Small 3.1Today'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/gpt-5-5/mistral-small-3-1 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-5/mistral-small-3-1?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill