Jamba Large vs Pixtral Large (25.02)
Pixtral Large (25.02) comes out ahead, 33 to 30 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
AI21 LabsJamba Large
30/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $8.00
- Context256K
- Our pick
Mistral AIPixtral Large (25.02)
33/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $6.00
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Pixtral Large (25.02) is our pick
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 33/100 against Jamba Large (30). It leads on price and inputs & features. Jamba Large wins on 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 pricePixtral Large (25.02)Pixtral Large (25.02) $3.00 · Jamba Large $3.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextJamba LargeJamba Large 256,000 · Pixtral Large (25.02) 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsPixtral Large (25.02)Jamba Large: Text · Pixtral Large (25.02): Text, Images
- Self-hostingJamba LargePublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Jamba Large | Pixtral Large (25.02) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 24 | 27 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 50 |
| Context window | 20% | 36 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 30/100 | 33/100 |
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 | Jamba LargeAI21 Labs | Pixtral Large (25.02)Mistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.00 | $2.00 |
| Output | $8.00 | $6.00 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.50 | $3.00 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official AI21 Labs API | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 256,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 8,192 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | jamba-large | — |
| API providers | 1 | 3 (best) |
| Released | Jul 1, 2025 | Apr 8, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Aug 22, 2024 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Jamba Large$36.00
- Pixtral Large (25.02)$32.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Jamba Large or Pixtral Large (25.02)?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 33/100 against Jamba Large (30). It leads on price and inputs & features. Jamba Large wins on 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, Jamba Large or Pixtral Large (25.02)?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Jamba Large costs $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official AI21 Labs API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.00 per million tokens for Pixtral Large (25.02) versus $3.50 for Jamba Large (1.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Jamba Large has not been scored yet and Pixtral Large (25.02) has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Jamba Large and Pixtral Large (25.02) 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?
Jamba Large has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Pixtral Large (25.02). Maximum output per response: Jamba Large up to 4,096, Pixtral Large (25.02) up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Jamba Large accepts text; Pixtral Large (25.02) accepts text and images. Pixtral Large (25.02) handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Jamba Large publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Pixtral Large (25.02) is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Jamba Large is the newest, released Jul 1, 2025. Pixtral Large (25.02) came out Apr 8, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Jamba Large Aug 22, 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.
Related comparisons
- Add GPT-5 ChatThree-way comparison
- Jamba Large vs GPT-5 ChatOpenAI
- Jamba Large vs Command A VisionCohere
- Jamba Large vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use PreviewGoogle
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Sonar Deep ResearchPerplexity
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Command ACohere
