ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Mistral Medium 3 vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2

Gemini 2.0 Flash comes out ahead, 65 to 54 and 52 on our weighted score.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.0 Flash

    Released Dec 11, 2024

    65/100
    • ECI134.7
    • Price—
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.0 Flash

  2. Mistral AI

    Mistral Medium 3

    Released May 7, 2025

    52/100
    • ECI134.1
    • Price$0.40 / $2.00
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Mistral Medium 3

  3. Anthropic

    Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2

    Released Oct 22, 2024

    54/100
    • ECI133.5
    • Price$3.00 / $15.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.0 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.0 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (54) and Mistral Medium 3 (52). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.0 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 · Mistral Medium 3 134.1 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5
  • Lowest priceMistral Medium 3Mistral Medium 3 $0.80 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Gemini 2.0 Flash unpriced
  • Longest contextGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash 1,048,576 · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 200,000 · Mistral Medium 3 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Mistral Medium 3: Text, Images · Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 2.0 FlashMistral Medium 3Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)67%595857
Inputs & features20%905060
Context window13%612432
Overall100%65/10052/10054/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Mistral Medium 3 vs Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 2.0 FlashGoogleMistral Medium 3Mistral AIClaude Sonnet 3.5 v2Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)134.7 (best)134.1133.5
ECI rank#116 of 148 (best)#117 of 148#119 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—59.5% (best)55.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—32.2% (best)8.5%
Price per million tokens
Input—$0.40 (best)$3.00
Output—$2.00 (best)$15.00
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)—$0.80 (best)$6.00
Long-context rate—Same rateSame rate
Price source—Official Mistral APIMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)131,072 tokens200,000 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens131,072 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsYesNoYes
AudioYesNoNo
VideoYesNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryProprietary
API model ID—mistral-medium-2505—
API providers—5 (best)1
ReleasedDec 11, 2024May 7, 2025Oct 22, 2024
Knowledge cutoffJun 2024May 2025Apr 30, 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemini 2.0 Flash—
  • Mistral Medium 3$8.00
  • Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2$60.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 2.0 Flash, Mistral Medium 3 or Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2?

Gemini 2.0 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (54) and Mistral Medium 3 (52). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Mistral Medium 3 or Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2?

Mistral Medium 3 is cheaper at $0.40 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 costs $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.80 per million tokens for Mistral Medium 3 versus $6.00 for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 (7.5× as much). Gemini 2.0 Flash has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.0 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 (#116 of 148), Mistral Medium 3 134.1 (#117 of 148) and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 133.5 (#119 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (124.3–136.7 vs 130.5–135.6), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.0 Flash, Mistral Medium 3 and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.0 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.0 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 and 131,072 for Mistral Medium 3. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.0 Flash up to 8,192, Mistral Medium 3 up to 131,072, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 2.0 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Mistral Medium 3 accepts text and images; Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 accepts text, images and PDFs. Gemini 2.0 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Gemini 2.0 Flash, Mistral Medium 3 and Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Mistral Medium 3 is the newest, released May 7, 2025. Gemini 2.0 Flash came out Dec 11, 2024; Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 came out Oct 22, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.0 Flash Jun 2024, Mistral Medium 3 May 2025, Claude Sonnet 3.5 v2 Apr 30, 2024.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons