Ministral 3B vs Mistral Nemo
Too close to call on our weighted score (Ministral 3B 49, Mistral Nemo 48). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Mistral AIMinistral 3B
49/100- ECI118.1
- Price$0.10 / $0.10
- Context128K
- Mistral AI
Mistral Nemo
48/100- ECI118.7
- Price$0.15 / $0.15
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Ministral 3B 49/100, Mistral Nemo 48/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mistral Nemo for raw capability and Ministral 3B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityMistral NemoCapabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Nemo 118.7 · Ministral 3B 118.1
- Lowest priceMinistral 3BMinistral 3B $0.10 · Mistral Nemo $0.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameMinistral 3B 128,000 · Mistral Nemo 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMinistral 3B: Text · Mistral Nemo: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Ministral 3B | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 38 | 39 |
| Price | 25% | 97 | 89 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 25 | 25 |
| Context window | 10% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 49/100 | 48/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Ministral 3BMistral AI | Mistral NemoMistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 118.1 | 118.7 (best) |
| ECI rank | #144 of 148 | #140 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 25.3% | 29.9% (best) |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.10 (best) | $0.15 |
| Output | $0.10 (best) | $0.15 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.10 (best) | $0.15 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Mistral API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | mistral-nemo |
| API providers | 1 | 5 (best) |
| Released | Oct 16, 2024 | Jul 1, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Mar 2024 | Jul 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Ministral 3B$1.20
- Mistral Nemo$1.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Ministral 3B or Mistral Nemo?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Ministral 3B 49/100, Mistral Nemo 48/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mistral Nemo for raw capability and Ministral 3B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Ministral 3B or Mistral Nemo?
Ministral 3B is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.10 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Mistral Nemo costs $0.15 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.10 per million tokens for Ministral 3B versus $0.15 for Mistral Nemo (1.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Mistral Nemo scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Nemo 118.7 (#140 of 148) and Ministral 3B 118.1 (#144 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (111.3–121.5 vs 107.4–121.8), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Mistral Nemo 29.9%, Ministral 3B 25.3%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Ministral 3B and Mistral Nemo yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Mistral Nemo 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?
Ministral 3B and Mistral Nemo share the same 128,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Ministral 3B up to 8,192, Mistral Nemo up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Ministral 3B accepts text; Mistral Nemo accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Ministral 3B is the newest, released Oct 16, 2024. Mistral Nemo came out Jul 1, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Ministral 3B Mar 2024, Mistral Nemo Jul 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 Llama-3.1-8B-InstructThree-way comparison
- Ministral 3B vs Llama-3.1-8B-InstructMeta · ECI 116.6
- Ministral 3B vs Qwen2.5 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 118.5
- Ministral 3B vs Gemma 3 4B ITGoogle · ECI 116.1
- Ministral 3B vs Claude Haiku 3Anthropic · ECI 118.4
- Mistral Nemo vs Llama-3.1-8B-InstructMeta · ECI 116.6
- Mistral Nemo vs Qwen2.5 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 118.5
