Side-by-side comparison
Voxtral Small 24B 2507 vs Step 3.5 Flash
Mistral
Voxtral Small 24B 2507
🔧 Tools
{} JSON
Input / 1M
$0.1000
Output / 1M
$0.3000
| Voxtral Small 24B 2507 | Step 3.5 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral | StepFun |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 32,000 | 262,144 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | tools, json_mode | tools, json_mode |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.1000 | 0.1000 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 0.3000 | 0.3000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, Voxtral Small 24B 2507 or Step 3.5 Flash?
Voxtral Small 24B 2507 is cheaper than Step 3.5 Flash on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0 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, Voxtral Small 24B 2507 or Step 3.5 Flash?
Step 3.5 Flash has the larger context window at 262k tokens versus 32k tokens for Voxtral Small 24B 2507. That means Step 3.5 Flash can ingest about 8.2x as much text per request.
What is the difference between Voxtral Small 24B 2507 and Step 3.5 Flash?
Voxtral Small 24B 2507 comes from Mistral; Step 3.5 Flash comes from StepFun. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.