Magistral Small vs Magistral Small 1.2
Too close to call on our weighted score (Magistral Small 1.2 53, Magistral Small 50). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Mistral AIMagistral Small
50/100- ECI133.2
- Price$0.50 / $1.50
- Context131K
- Mistral AI
Magistral Small 1.2
53/100- ECI131.4
- Price$0.50 / $1.50
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Magistral Small 1.2 53/100, Magistral Small 50/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Magistral Small for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityMagistral SmallCapabilities Index (ECI): Magistral Small 133.2 · Magistral Small 1.2 131.4
- Lowest priceSame priceMagistral Small $0.75 · Magistral Small 1.2 $0.75 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameMagistral Small 131,072 · Magistral Small 1.2 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsMagistral Small 1.2Magistral Small: Text · Magistral Small 1.2: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Magistral Small | Magistral Small 1.2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 57 | 55 |
| Price | 25% | 56 | 56 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 60 |
| Context window | 10% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 50/100 | 53/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Magistral SmallMistral AI | Magistral Small 1.2Mistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 133.2 (best) | 131.4 |
| ECI rank | #120 of 148 (best) | #124 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 56.1% (best) | 47.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 30.0% (best) | 28.1% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.50 | $0.50 |
| Output | $1.50 | $1.50 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.75 | $0.75 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenApache 2.0 | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 1 | 1 |
| Released | Jun 10, 2025 | Sep 18, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Magistral Small$8.00
- Magistral Small 1.2$8.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Magistral Small or Magistral Small 1.2?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Magistral Small 1.2 53/100, Magistral Small 50/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Magistral Small for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Magistral Small or Magistral Small 1.2?
Magistral Small and Magistral Small 1.2 cost the same: $0.50 input / $1.50 output per million tokens.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Magistral Small scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Magistral Small 133.2 (#120 of 148) and Magistral Small 1.2 131.4 (#124 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (128.9–134.4 vs 126.5–133.4), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Magistral Small 56.1%, Magistral Small 1.2 47.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Magistral Small 30.0%, Magistral Small 1.2 28.1%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Magistral Small and Magistral Small 1.2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Magistral Small 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?
Magistral Small and Magistral Small 1.2 share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: Magistral Small up to 8,192, Magistral Small 1.2 up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Magistral Small accepts text; Magistral Small 1.2 accepts text and images. Magistral Small 1.2 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Magistral Small 1.2 is the newest, released Sep 18, 2025. Magistral Small came out Jun 10, 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.
Related comparisons
- Add GPT-4.1 miniThree-way comparison
- Magistral Small vs GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI · ECI 135.0
- Magistral Small vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B InstructMeta · ECI 132.2
- Magistral Small vs DeepSeek-V3DeepSeek · ECI 132.3
- Magistral Small vs QwQ 32BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 137.6
- Magistral Small 1.2 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B InstructMeta · ECI 132.2
- Magistral Small 1.2 vs GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI · ECI 135.0
