Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) by Mistral or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 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
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 28.6 points higher (39.9 vs 11.3) but costs 62× as much to run the benchmark ($2632 vs $42.5; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B when you need intelligence above 11.3, and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) when 11.3 is enough.
| Metric | Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 11.3 | 39.9 | +253.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 3.5× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $42.50 | $2,632.05 | +6093.1% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 62× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 14.50s | 61.58s | +324.7% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 324.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.60 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning): 253.1% more intelligence, 6093.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 324.7% 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.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 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)Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BToday'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/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-small-4/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill