ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Llama-3.2-1B vs Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 vs Gemma 3 4B IT

Gemma 3 4B IT comes out ahead, 24 to 11 and 10 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Meta

    Llama-3.2-1B

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    11/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.027 / $0.201
    • Context131K
  2. Mistral AI

    Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3

    Released May 22, 2024

    10/100
    • ECI109.0
    • Price—
    • Context33K
  3. Our pick

    Google

    Gemma 3 4B IT

    Released Mar 12, 2025

    24/100
    • ECI115.8
    • Price$0.05 / $0.10
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

Gemma 3 4B IT is our pick

Gemma 3 4B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 24/100 against Llama-3.2-1B (11) and Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 (10). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025), because Llama-3.2-1B has no Capabilities Index score yet.

  • CapabilityGemma 3 4B ITShared benchmarks: Gemma 3 4B IT 15.4% · Llama-3.2-1B 12.2% · Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 7.7%
  • Lowest priceGemma 3 4B ITGemma 3 4B IT $0.063 · Llama-3.2-1B $0.07 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 unpriced
  • Longest contextLlama-3.2-1B and Gemma 3 4B ITLlama-3.2-1B 131,072 · Gemma 3 4B IT 131,072 · Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemma 3 4B ITLlama-3.2-1B: Text · Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3: Text · Gemma 3 4B IT: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-1BMistral 7B Instruct v0.3Gemma 3 4B IT
CapabilityShared benchmarks67%12815
Inputs & features20%02550
Context window13%25025
Overall100%11/10010/10024/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. 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.

Llama-3.2-1B vs Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 vs Gemma 3 4B IT specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-1BMetaMistral 7B Instruct v0.3Mistral AIGemma 3 4B ITGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—109.0115.8 (best)
ECI rank—#164 of 165#163 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions23.9% (best)15.2%23.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics0.6%0.3%7.5% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.027 (best)—$0.05
Output$0.201—$0.10 (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.07—$0.063 (best)
Long-context rateSame rate—Same rate
Price sourceMedian of 6 providers—Median of 9 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingNoYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenLlama 3.2 Community LicenseOpenApache 2.0Open
API model ID———
API providers6110 (best)
ReleasedSep 25, 2024May 22, 2024Mar 12, 2025
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023—Aug 2024
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.

  • Llama-3.2-1B$0.672
  • Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3—
  • Gemma 3 4B IT$0.70
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama-3.2-1B, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 or Gemma 3 4B IT?

Gemma 3 4B IT is the better all-round choice, scoring 24/100 against Llama-3.2-1B (11) and Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 (10). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025), because Llama-3.2-1B has no Capabilities Index score yet.

Which is cheaper, Llama-3.2-1B, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 or Gemma 3 4B IT?

Gemma 3 4B IT is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.10 output per million tokens (median across 9 API providers). Llama-3.2-1B costs $0.027 input / $0.201 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.063 per million tokens for Gemma 3 4B IT versus $0.07 for Llama-3.2-1B (1.1× as much). Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Not every model here has a Capabilities Index score, so we compare the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025): Gemma 3 4B IT 15.4%, Llama-3.2-1B 12.2% and Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 7.7%. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Llama-3.2-1B 23.9%, Gemma 3 4B IT 23.2%, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 15.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemma 3 4B IT 7.5%, Llama-3.2-1B 0.6%, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 0.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama-3.2-1B, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 and Gemma 3 4B IT yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemma 3 4B IT leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Note that Llama-3.2-1B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Llama-3.2-1B and Gemma 3 4B IT have the largest context windows (131,072 and 131,072 tokens), against 32,768 for Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-1B up to 8,192, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 up to 32,768, Gemma 3 4B IT up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama-3.2-1B accepts text; Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 accepts text; Gemma 3 4B IT accepts text and images. Gemma 3 4B IT handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (Llama 3.2 Community License and Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Gemma 3 4B IT is the newest, released Mar 12, 2025. Llama-3.2-1B came out Sep 25, 2024; Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3 came out May 22, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-1B Dec 2023, Gemma 3 4B IT Aug 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 Nov 2, 2026.