ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs Mistral Small 3.2

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview comes out ahead, 73 to 64 on our weighted score, though Mistral Small 3.2 is 3.8× cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview

    Released Mar 3, 2026Deprecated

    73/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $1.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview

  2. Mistral AI

    Mistral Small 3.2

    Released Jun 20, 2025

    64/100
    • ECI131.7
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Mistral Small 3.2

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is our pick

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Mistral Small 3.2 (64). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Mistral Small 3.2 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 priceMistral Small 3.2Mistral Small 3.2 $0.15 · Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview $0.563 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview 1,048,576 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Mistral Small 3.2: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingMistral Small 3.2Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewMistral Small 3.2
Price50%6289
Inputs & features30%10050
Context window20%6124
Overall100%73/10064/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. 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 3.1 Flash Lite Preview vs Mistral Small 3.2 specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewGoogleMistral Small 3.2Mistral AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—131.7
ECI rank—#123 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—49.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—30.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.25$0.10 (best)
Output$1.50$0.30 (best)
Cached input$0.025—
Blended (3:1)$0.563$0.15 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Google APIOfficial Mistral API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesminimal · low · medium · highNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDgemini-3.1-flash-lite-previewmistral-small-2506
API providers10 (best)6
ReleasedMar 3, 2026Jun 20, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJan 2025Mar 2025
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 3.1 Flash Lite Preview$5.50
  • Mistral Small 3.2$1.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview or Mistral Small 3.2?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Mistral Small 3.2 (64). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Mistral Small 3.2 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, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview or Mistral Small 3.2?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview costs $0.25 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Mistral Small 3.2 versus $0.563 for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview (3.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview has not been scored yet and Mistral Small 3.2 has an ECI of 131.7.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview and Mistral Small 3.2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 128,000 for Mistral Small 3.2. Maximum output per response: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview up to 65,536, Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Mistral Small 3.2 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview is the newest, released Mar 3, 2026. Mistral Small 3.2 came out Jun 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview Jan 2025, Mistral Small 3.2 Mar 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons