LongCat 2.0 vs Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: LongCat 2.0 by LongCat or Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) 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
LongCat 2.0 scores 7.8 points higher (19.1 vs 11.3) but costs 13× as much to run the benchmark ($545 vs $42.5; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick LongCat 2.0 when you need intelligence above 11.3, and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) when 11.3 is enough.
| Metric | LongCat 2.0 | Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 19.1 | 11.3 | −40.8% Mistral Small 4 (Reas… is 40.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $544.74 | $42.50 | −92.2% Mistral Small 4 (Reas… is 92.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 35.54s | 14.50s | −59.2% Mistral Small 4 (Reas… is 59.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.75 / $2.95 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) vs LongCat 2.0: 40.8% less intelligence, 92.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 59.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- LongCat 2.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
- Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
LongCat 2.0Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Today'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/longcat-2-0/mistral-small-4 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/longcat-2-0/mistral-small-4?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill