ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GLM-4.5-Flash vs Mistral Small 3.2 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B

Too close to call on our weighted score (GLM-4.5-Flash 65, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65, Mistral Small 3.2 64). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.5-Flash

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • PriceFree / Free
    • Context131K
  2. Mistral AI

    Mistral Small 3.2

    Released Jun 20, 2025

    64/100
    • ECI131.7
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context128K
  3. NVIDIA

    Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B

    Released Apr 7, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • PriceFree / Free
    • Context128K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.5-Flash 65/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100, Mistral Small 3.2 64/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.5-Flash on price and GLM-4.5-Flash for long inputs. 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 priceGLM-4.5-Flash and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BGLM-4.5-Flash Free · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B Free · Mistral Small 3.2 $0.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-4.5-FlashGLM-4.5-Flash 131,072 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsMistral Small 3.2GLM-4.5-Flash: Text · Mistral Small 3.2: Text, Images · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text
  • Self-hostingMistral Small 3.2 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGLM-4.5-FlashMistral Small 3.2Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
Price50%10089100
Inputs & features30%355035
Context window20%242424
Overall100%65/10064/10065/100

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.

GLM-4.5-Flash vs Mistral Small 3.2 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B specifications side by side
SpecificationGLM-4.5-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AILlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIA
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
InputFree (best)$0.10Free (best)
OutputFree (best)$0.30Free (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)Free (best)$0.15Free (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Z.AI APIOfficial Mistral APIOfficial Nvidia API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens (best)128,000 tokens128,000 tokens
Max output98,304 tokens (best)16,384 tokens8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenOpen
API model IDglm-4.5-flashmistral-small-2506nvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1
API providers46 (best)1
ReleasedJul 28, 2025Jun 20, 2025Apr 7, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 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.

  • GLM-4.5-FlashFree
  • Mistral Small 3.2$1.60
  • Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BFree
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GLM-4.5-Flash, Mistral Small 3.2 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.5-Flash 65/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100, Mistral Small 3.2 64/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.5-Flash on price and GLM-4.5-Flash for long inputs. 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, GLM-4.5-Flash, Mistral Small 3.2 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B?

GLM-4.5-Flash is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B costs Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price); Mistral Small 3.2 costs $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). GLM-4.5-Flash is listed as free.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GLM-4.5-Flash has not been scored yet, Mistral Small 3.2 has an ECI of 131.7 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.5-Flash, Mistral Small 3.2 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 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?

GLM-4.5-Flash has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Mistral Small 3.2 and 128,000 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.5-Flash up to 98,304, Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GLM-4.5-Flash accepts text; Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images; Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text. Mistral Small 3.2 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Mistral Small 3.2 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GLM-4.5-Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

GLM-4.5-Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Mistral Small 3.2 came out Jun 20, 2025; Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B came out Apr 7, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.5-Flash Apr 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.