Mistral Small 3.2 vs Beam 1.0
Which is better for the money: Mistral Small 3.2 by Mistral or Beam 1.0 by Reflection? 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
Beam 1.0 scores 23.3 points higher (30.3 vs 7.0) but costs 2.6× as much to run the benchmark ($319 vs $122; both mid-range class). Pick Beam 1.0 when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Mistral Small 3.2.
| Metric | Mistral Small 3.2 | Beam 1.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 7.0 | 30.3 | +332.9% Beam 1.0 is 4.3× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $121.78 | $318.73 | +161.7% Beam 1.0 is 2.6× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.50s | 8.02s | −35.8% Beam 1.0 is 35.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.07 / $0.20 | $0.40 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Beam 1.0 vs Mistral Small 3.2: 332.9% more intelligence, 161.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 35.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mistral Small 3.2 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
- Beam 1.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Mistral Small 3.2Beam 1.0Today'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/mistral-small-3-2/reflection-beam · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-small-3-2/reflection-beam?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill