Mistral Large 3 vs Qwen3.5 27B vs Seed 2.0 Code
Qwen3.5 27B comes out ahead, 61 to 57 and 50 on our weighted score, though Mistral Large 3 is 9% cheaper per token.
Mistral AIMistral Large 3
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.50 / $1.50
- Context262K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 27B
61/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $2.40
- Context262K
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Code
57/100- ECI—
- Price$0.475 / $2.37
- Context262K
Qwen3.5 27B is our pick
Qwen3.5 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and Mistral Large 3 (50). It leads on inputs & features. Mistral Large 3 wins on price. 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 priceMistral Large 3Mistral Large 3 $0.75 · Qwen3.5 27B $0.825 · Seed 2.0 Code $0.95 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameMistral Large 3 262,144 · Qwen3.5 27B 262,144 · Seed 2.0 Code 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 27BMistral Large 3: Text, Images · Qwen3.5 27B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Seed 2.0 Code: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingMistral Large 3 and Qwen3.5 27BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Mistral Large 3 | Qwen3.5 27B | Seed 2.0 Code |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 56 | 54 | 51 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 50 | 90 | 80 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 37 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 50/100 | 61/100 | 57/100 |
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 | Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | Qwen3.5 27BAlibaba (Qwen) | Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.50 | $0.30 (best) | $0.475 |
| Output | $1.50 (best) | $2.40 | $2.37 |
| Cached input | $0.05 (best) | — | $0.095 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.75 (best) | $0.825 | $0.95 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Over 32K: $0.712 / $3.56 |
| Price source | Official Mistral API | Official Alibaba API | Official Volcengine Ark API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 262,144 tokens | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | mistral-large-2512 | qwen3.5-27b | doubao-seed-2-0-code-preview-260215 |
| API providers | 13 | 16 (best) | 10 |
| Released | Dec 2, 2025 | Feb 23, 2026 | Feb 14, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Nov 2024 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Mistral Large 3$8.00
- Qwen3.5 27B$7.80
- Seed 2.0 Code$9.50
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Mistral Large 3, Qwen3.5 27B or Seed 2.0 Code?
Qwen3.5 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and Mistral Large 3 (50). It leads on inputs & features. Mistral Large 3 wins on price. 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, Mistral Large 3, Qwen3.5 27B or Seed 2.0 Code?
Mistral Large 3 is cheaper at $0.50 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Qwen3.5 27B costs $0.30 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Seed 2.0 Code costs $0.475 input / $2.37 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.75 per million tokens for Mistral Large 3 versus $0.825 for Qwen3.5 27B (1.1× as much) and $0.95 for Seed 2.0 Code (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Mistral Large 3 has not been scored yet, Qwen3.5 27B has not been scored yet and Seed 2.0 Code has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mistral Large 3, Qwen3.5 27B and Seed 2.0 Code yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mistral Large 3, Qwen3.5 27B and Seed 2.0 Code share the same 262,144-token context window. Maximum output per response: Mistral Large 3 up to 262,144, Qwen3.5 27B up to 65,536, Seed 2.0 Code up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Mistral Large 3 accepts text and images; Qwen3.5 27B accepts text, images, audio and video; Seed 2.0 Code accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 27B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Mistral Large 3 and Qwen3.5 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Code is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 27B is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. Seed 2.0 Code came out Feb 14, 2026; Mistral Large 3 came out Dec 2, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Mistral Large 3 Nov 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.
