Ministral 14B vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview
Ministral 14B comes out ahead, 64 to 35 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Mistral AIMinistral 14B
64/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.20
- Context262K
GoogleGemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview
35/100- ECI—
- Price$1.25 / $10.00
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Ministral 14B is our pick
Ministral 14B is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview (35). It leads on price and context window. Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview wins on inputs & features. 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 priceMinistral 14BMinistral 14B $0.20 · Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview $3.44 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMinistral 14BMinistral 14B 262,144 · Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMinistral 14B: Text, Images · Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview: Text, Images
- Self-hostingMinistral 14BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Ministral 14B | Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 83 | 24 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 50 | 60 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 64/100 | 35/100 |
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 | Ministral 14BMistral AI | Gemini 2.5 Computer Use PreviewGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.20 (best) | $1.25 |
| Output | $0.20 (best) | $10.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.20 (best) | $3.44 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 200K: $2.50 / $15.00 |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Google API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 64,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | gemini-2.5-computer-use-preview-10-2025 |
| API providers | 1 | 2 (best) |
| Released | Dec 2, 2025 | Oct 7, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jan 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Ministral 14B$2.40
- Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview$32.50
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Ministral 14B or Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview?
Ministral 14B is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview (35). It leads on price and context window. Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview wins on inputs & features. 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, Ministral 14B or Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview?
Ministral 14B is cheaper at $0.20 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview costs $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.20 per million tokens for Ministral 14B versus $3.44 for Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview (17× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Ministral 14B has not been scored yet and Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Ministral 14B and Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview 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?
Ministral 14B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 128,000 for Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview. Maximum output per response: Ministral 14B up to 262,144, Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview up to 64,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Ministral 14B accepts text and images; Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview accepts text and images. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Ministral 14B publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Ministral 14B is the newest, released Dec 2, 2025. Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview came out Oct 7, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview Jan 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 Seed 2.0 LiteThree-way comparison
- Ministral 14B vs Seed 2.0 LiteByteDance Seed
- Ministral 14B vs Trendyol Asure 12BTrendyol
- Ministral 14B vs GLM-4.6V-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Ministral 14B vs Solar Pro 3Upstage
- Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview vs GPT-5-CodexOpenAI
- Gemini 2.5 Computer Use Preview vs Jamba LargeAI21 Labs
