Granite 4.2 3B vs Mistral Medium 3.5
Which is better for the money: Granite 4.2 3B by IBM 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 5.1 points higher (14.2 vs 9.1) but costs 85× as much to run the benchmark ($1264 vs $14.9; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Mistral Medium 3.5 when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 3B | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.1 | 14.2 | +56.0% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 56.0% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.91 | $1,263.80 | +8376.2% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 85× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 35.30s | 17.96s | −49.1% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 49.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.03 / $0.12 | $1.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Granite 4.2 3B: 56.0% more intelligence, 8376.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 49.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Granite 4.2 3B 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.
Granite 4.2 3BMistral 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/granite-4-2-3b/mistral-medium-3-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/granite-4-2-3b/mistral-medium-3-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill