GPT-6 Astra (High) vs Mistral Small 3.2
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Astra (High) by OpenAI or Mistral Small 3.2 by Mistral? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-6 Astra (High) scores 43.9 points higher (50.9 vs 7.0) but costs 24× as much to run the benchmark ($2925 vs $122; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-6 Astra (High) when you need intelligence above 7.0, and Mistral Small 3.2 when 7.0 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6 Astra (High) | Mistral Small 3.2 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 50.9 | 7.0 | −86.2% Mistral Small 3.2 is 86.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,925.01 | $121.78 | −95.8% Mistral Small 3.2 is 95.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 60.20s | 9.55s | −84.1% Mistral Small 3.2 is 84.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.07 / $0.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Mistral Small 3.2 vs GPT-6 Astra (High): 86.2% less intelligence, 95.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 84.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Astra (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- Mistral Small 3.2 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
GPT-6 Astra (High)Mistral Small 3.2Today'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-6-astra-high/mistral-small-3-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-astra-high/mistral-small-3-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill