Apertus 8B vs Ministral 14B vs Rnj-1 Instruct
Ministral 14B comes out ahead, 63 to 54 and 50 on our weighted score, though Apertus 8B is 29% cheaper per token.
Swiss AI
Apertus 8B
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.20
- Context66K
- Our pick
Mistral AIMinistral 14B
63/100- ECI—
- Price$0.175 / $0.175
- Context262K
Essential AI
Rnj-1 Instruct
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.15
- Context33K
Ministral 14B is our pick
Ministral 14B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Apertus 8B (54) and Rnj-1 Instruct (50). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Apertus 8B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceApertus 8BApertus 8B $0.125 · Rnj-1 Instruct $0.15 · Ministral 14B $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMinistral 14BMinistral 14B 262,144 · Apertus 8B 65,536 · Rnj-1 Instruct 32,768 tokens
- Widest inputsMinistral 14BApertus 8B: Text · Ministral 14B: Text, Images · Rnj-1 Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 8B | Ministral 14B | Rnj-1 Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 89 | 82 | 85 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 50 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 37 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 54/100 | 63/100 | 50/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Apertus 8BSwiss AI | Ministral 14BMistral AI | Rnj-1 InstructEssential AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 (best) | $0.175 | $0.15 |
| Output | $0.20 | $0.175 | $0.15 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.125 (best) | $0.175 | $0.15 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 2 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | OpenApache-2.0 | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | — | — | — |
| API providers | 1 | 2 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Dec 2, 2025 | Dec 4, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Apertus 8B$1.40
- Ministral 14B$2.10
- Rnj-1 Instruct$1.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 8B, Ministral 14B or Rnj-1 Instruct?
Ministral 14B is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Apertus 8B (54) and Rnj-1 Instruct (50). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Apertus 8B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Apertus 8B, Ministral 14B or Rnj-1 Instruct?
Apertus 8B is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Rnj-1 Instruct costs $0.15 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Ministral 14B costs $0.175 input / $0.175 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.125 per million tokens for Apertus 8B versus $0.15 for Rnj-1 Instruct (1.2× as much) and $0.175 for Ministral 14B (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Apertus 8B has not been scored yet, Ministral 14B has not been scored yet and Rnj-1 Instruct has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 8B, Ministral 14B and Rnj-1 Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Ministral 14B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 65,536 for Apertus 8B and 32,768 for Rnj-1 Instruct. Maximum output per response: Apertus 8B up to 8,192, Ministral 14B up to 262,144, Rnj-1 Instruct up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 8B accepts text; Ministral 14B accepts text and images; Rnj-1 Instruct accepts text. Ministral 14B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights (Apache-2.0 and Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Rnj-1 Instruct is the newest, released Dec 4, 2025. Ministral 14B came out Dec 2, 2025; Apertus 8B came out Sep 2, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 8B Sep 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
