Aya Vision 32B vs Pixtral Large (25.02)
Pixtral Large (25.02) comes out ahead, 40 to 15 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
CohereAya Vision 32B
15/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context16K
- Our pick
Mistral AIPixtral Large (25.02)
40/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $6.00
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Pixtral Large (25.02) is our pick
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 40/100 against Aya Vision 32B (15). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 pricePixtral Large (25.02)Pixtral Large (25.02) $3.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Aya Vision 32B unpriced
- Longest contextPixtral Large (25.02)Pixtral Large (25.02) 128,000 · Aya Vision 32B 16,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsAya Vision 32B: Text, Images · Pixtral Large (25.02): Text, Images
- Self-hostingAya Vision 32BPublishes downloadable weights (CC-BY-NC-4.0)
| Measure | Weight | Aya Vision 32B | Pixtral Large (25.02) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 25 | 50 |
| Context window | 40% | 0 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 15/100 | 40/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Aya Vision 32BCohere | Pixtral Large (25.02)Mistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | — | $2.00 |
| Output | — | $6.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $3.00 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 16,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 4,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenCC-BY-NC-4.0 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | c4ai-aya-vision-32b | — |
| API providers | 1 | 3 (best) |
| Released | Mar 4, 2025 | Apr 8, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Aya Vision 32B—
- Pixtral Large (25.02)$32.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Aya Vision 32B or Pixtral Large (25.02)?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 40/100 against Aya Vision 32B (15). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Aya Vision 32B or Pixtral Large (25.02)?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.00 per million tokens for Pixtral Large (25.02) versus . Aya Vision 32B has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Aya Vision 32B has not been scored yet and Pixtral Large (25.02) has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Aya Vision 32B and Pixtral Large (25.02) yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Aya Vision 32B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Pixtral Large (25.02) has the largest context window at 128,000 tokens, against 16,000 for Aya Vision 32B. Maximum output per response: Aya Vision 32B up to 4,000, Pixtral Large (25.02) up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Aya Vision 32B accepts text and images; Pixtral Large (25.02) accepts text and images. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Aya Vision 32B publishes its weights (CC-BY-NC-4.0) and can be self-hosted; Pixtral Large (25.02) is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the newest, released Apr 8, 2025. Aya Vision 32B came out Mar 4, 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Magistral MediumThree-way comparison
- Aya Vision 32B vs Magistral MediumMistral AI
- Aya Vision 32B vs QVQ MaxAlibaba (Qwen)
- Aya Vision 32B vs Sonar Deep ResearchPerplexity
- Aya Vision 32B vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIA
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Sonar Deep ResearchPerplexity
