Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) by Mistral or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? 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
Qwen3.7 Max scores 18.2 points higher (29.5 vs 11.3) but costs 54× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $42.5; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 11.3, and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) when 11.3 is enough.
| Metric | Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 11.3 | 29.5 | +161.1% Qwen3.7 Max is 2.6× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $42.50 | $2,277.12 | +5257.9% Qwen3.7 Max is 54× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 14.50s | 16.61s | +14.6% Qwen3.7 Max is 14.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.60 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning): 161.1% more intelligence, 5257.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 14.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Qwen3.7 MaxToday'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-4/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-small-4/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill