Llama-3.2-3B vs Vision Medium vs Pixtral 12B
Vision Medium comes out ahead, 84 to 40 and 10 on our weighted score.
MetaLlama-3.2-3B
10/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.335
- Context131K
- Our pick
VisparkVision Medium
84/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1M
Mistral AIPixtral 12B
40/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.15
- Context128K
Vision Medium is our pick
Vision Medium is the better all-round choice, scoring 84/100 against Pixtral 12B (40) and Llama-3.2-3B (10). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 12BPixtral 12B $0.15 · Llama-3.2-3B $0.159 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Vision Medium unpriced
- Longest contextVision MediumVision Medium 1,000,000 · Llama-3.2-3B 131,072 · Pixtral 12B 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsVision MediumLlama-3.2-3B: Text · Vision Medium: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Pixtral 12B: Text, Images
- Self-hostingLlama-3.2-3B and Pixtral 12BPublishes downloadable weights (Llama 3.2 Community License)
| Measure | Weight | Llama-3.2-3B | Vision Medium | Pixtral 12B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 0 | 100 | 50 |
| Context window | 40% | 24 | 60 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 10/100 | 84/100 | 40/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Llama-3.2-3BMeta | Vision MediumVispark | Pixtral 12BMistral AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 (best) | — | $0.15 |
| Output | $0.335 | — | $0.15 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.159 | — | $0.15 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | — | Official Mistral API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 65,536 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | No | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenLlama 3.2 Community License | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | — | pixtral-12b |
| API providers | 3 | — | 4 (best) |
| Released | Sep 25, 2024 | May 15, 2024 | Sep 1, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Dec 2023 | — | Sep 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Llama-3.2-3B$1.67
- Vision Medium—
- Pixtral 12B$1.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Llama-3.2-3B, Vision Medium or Pixtral 12B?
Vision Medium is the better all-round choice, scoring 84/100 against Pixtral 12B (40) and Llama-3.2-3B (10). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Llama-3.2-3B, Vision Medium or Pixtral 12B?
Pixtral 12B is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Llama-3.2-3B costs $0.10 input / $0.335 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Pixtral 12B versus $0.159 for Llama-3.2-3B (1.1× as much). Vision Medium has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Llama-3.2-3B has not been scored yet, Vision Medium has not been scored yet and Pixtral 12B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama-3.2-3B, Vision Medium and Pixtral 12B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Llama-3.2-3B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Vision Medium has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Llama-3.2-3B and 128,000 for Pixtral 12B. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-3B up to 8,192, Vision Medium up to 65,536, Pixtral 12B up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Llama-3.2-3B accepts text; Vision Medium accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Pixtral 12B accepts text and images. Vision Medium handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Llama-3.2-3B and Pixtral 12B publishes its weights (Llama 3.2 Community License) and can be self-hosted; Vision Medium is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Llama-3.2-3B is the newest, released Sep 25, 2024. Pixtral 12B came out Sep 1, 2024; Vision Medium came out May 15, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-3B Dec 2023, Pixtral 12B Sep 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.
