Side-by-side comparison
Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Mistral
Mistral Medium 3.1
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.4000
Output / 1M
$2.0000
Qwen
Qwen3.5 397B A17B
👁 Vision
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.3900
Output / 1M
$2.3400
| Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen3.5 397B A17B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral | Qwen |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 131,072 | 262,144 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | vision, tools, json_mode | vision, tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.4000 | 0.3900 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 2.0000 | 2.3400 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Mistral Medium 3.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Mistral Medium 3.1 is cheaper than Qwen3.5 397B A17B on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.165 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, Mistral Medium 3.1 or Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Qwen3.5 397B A17B has the larger context window at 262k tokens versus 131k tokens for Mistral Medium 3.1. That means Qwen3.5 397B A17B can ingest about 2.0x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Mistral Medium 3.1 and Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Mistral Medium 3.1 comes from Mistral; Qwen3.5 397B A17B comes from Qwen. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.