GPT-5.1 Codex mini vs Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Qwen3 Coder Flash
GPT-5.1 Codex mini comes out ahead, 59 to 50 and 50 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 Coder Flash is 13% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
OpenAIGPT-5.1 Codex mini
59/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $2.00
- Context400K
Mistral AIMistral Medium 3.1
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.40 / $2.00
- Context262K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 Coder Flash
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.50
- Context1M
GPT-5.1 Codex mini is our pick
GPT-5.1 Codex mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Qwen3 Coder Flash (50) and Mistral Medium 3.1 (50). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen3 Coder Flash wins on price and context window. 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 priceQwen3 Coder FlashQwen3 Coder Flash $0.60 · GPT-5.1 Codex mini $0.688 · Mistral Medium 3.1 $0.80 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3 Coder FlashQwen3 Coder Flash 1,000,000 · GPT-5.1 Codex mini 400,000 · Mistral Medium 3.1 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsGPT-5.1 Codex mini and Mistral Medium 3.1GPT-5.1 Codex mini: Text, Images · Mistral Medium 3.1: Text, Images · Qwen3 Coder Flash: Text
- Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | GPT-5.1 Codex mini | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Qwen3 Coder Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 58 | 54 | 60 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 50 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 44 | 37 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 59/100 | 50/100 | 50/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GPT-5.1 Codex miniOpenAI | Mistral Medium 3.1Mistral AI | Qwen3 Coder FlashAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.25 (best) | $0.40 | $0.30 |
| Output | $2.00 | $2.00 | $1.50 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.688 | $0.80 | $0.60 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 10 providers | Official Mistral API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 400,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | mistral-medium-2508 | qwen3-coder-flash |
| API providers | 10 (best) | 1 | 10 (best) |
| Released | Nov 13, 2025 | Aug 12, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 30, 2024 | May 2025 | Apr 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GPT-5.1 Codex mini$6.50
- Mistral Medium 3.1$8.00
- Qwen3 Coder Flash$6.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-5.1 Codex mini, Mistral Medium 3.1 or Qwen3 Coder Flash?
GPT-5.1 Codex mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Qwen3 Coder Flash (50) and Mistral Medium 3.1 (50). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen3 Coder Flash wins on price and context window. 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, GPT-5.1 Codex mini, Mistral Medium 3.1 or Qwen3 Coder Flash?
Qwen3 Coder Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). GPT-5.1 Codex mini costs $0.25 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (median across 10 API providers); Mistral Medium 3.1 costs $0.40 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.60 per million tokens for Qwen3 Coder Flash versus $0.688 for GPT-5.1 Codex mini (1.1× as much) and $0.80 for Mistral Medium 3.1 (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GPT-5.1 Codex mini has not been scored yet, Mistral Medium 3.1 has not been scored yet and Qwen3 Coder Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-5.1 Codex mini, Mistral Medium 3.1 and Qwen3 Coder Flash 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?
Qwen3 Coder Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 400,000 for GPT-5.1 Codex mini and 262,144 for Mistral Medium 3.1. Maximum output per response: GPT-5.1 Codex mini up to 128,000, Mistral Medium 3.1 up to 262,144, Qwen3 Coder Flash up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-5.1 Codex mini accepts text and images; Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts text and images; Qwen3 Coder Flash accepts text. GPT-5.1 Codex mini handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. GPT-5.1 Codex mini, Mistral Medium 3.1 and Qwen3 Coder Flash are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
GPT-5.1 Codex mini is the newest, released Nov 13, 2025. Mistral Medium 3.1 came out Aug 12, 2025; Qwen3 Coder Flash came out Jul 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-5.1 Codex mini Sep 30, 2024, Mistral Medium 3.1 May 2025, Qwen3 Coder Flash Apr 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.
