ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

GPT-4.1 nano vs Mistral Small 3.2

GPT-4.1 nano comes out ahead, 63 to 60 on our weighted score, though Mistral Small 3.2 is 14% cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    OpenAI

    GPT-4.1 nano

    Released Apr 14, 2025Deprecated

    63/100
    • ECI129.6
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove GPT-4.1 nano

  2. Mistral AI

    Mistral Small 3.2

    Released Jun 20, 2025

    60/100
    • 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

GPT-4.1 nano is our pick

GPT-4.1 nano is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Mistral Small 3.2 (60). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Mistral Small 3.2 wins on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityMistral Small 3.2Capabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Small 3.2 131.7 · GPT-4.1 nano 129.6
  • Lowest priceMistral Small 3.2Mistral Small 3.2 $0.15 · GPT-4.1 nano $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4.1 nano 1,047,576 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsGPT-4.1 nano: Text, Images · Mistral Small 3.2: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingMistral Small 3.2Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGPT-4.1 nanoMistral Small 3.2
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5255
Price25%8689
Inputs & features15%6050
Context window10%6124
Overall100%63/10060/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

GPT-4.1 nano vs Mistral Small 3.2 specifications side by side
SpecificationGPT-4.1 nanoOpenAIMistral Small 3.2Mistral AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)129.6131.7 (best)
ECI rank#127 of 148#123 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions48.9%49.1% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics28.9%30.3% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions6.0%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10$0.10
Output$0.40$0.30 (best)
Cached input$0.025—
Blended (3:1)$0.175$0.15 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial OpenAI APIOfficial Mistral API
Limits
Context window1,047,576 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDgpt-4.1-nanomistral-small-2506
API providers20 (best)6
ReleasedApr 14, 2025Jun 20, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2024Mar 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.

  • GPT-4.1 nano$1.80
  • Mistral Small 3.2$1.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: GPT-4.1 nano or Mistral Small 3.2?

GPT-4.1 nano is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Mistral Small 3.2 (60). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Mistral Small 3.2 wins on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano 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). GPT-4.1 nano costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official OpenAI 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 $0.175 for GPT-4.1 nano (1.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Mistral Small 3.2 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Small 3.2 131.7 (#123 of 148) and GPT-4.1 nano 129.6 (#127 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (126.6–133.9 vs 123.2–132.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Mistral Small 3.2 49.1%, GPT-4.1 nano 48.9%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Mistral Small 3.2 30.3%, GPT-4.1 nano 28.9%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-4.1 nano and Mistral Small 3.2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Mistral Small 3.2 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 nano has the largest context window at 1,047,576 tokens, against 128,000 for Mistral Small 3.2. Maximum output per response: GPT-4.1 nano up to 32,768, Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

GPT-4.1 nano accepts text and images; Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Mistral Small 3.2 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-4.1 nano is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Mistral Small 3.2 is the newest, released Jun 20, 2025. GPT-4.1 nano came out Apr 14, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-4.1 nano Apr 2024, 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