ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Mistral Medium 3 vs QwQ 32B vs GPT-4.1 mini

GPT-4.1 mini comes out ahead, 60 to 53 and 53 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Mistral AI

    Mistral Medium 3

    Released May 7, 2025

    53/100
    • ECI134.1
    • Price$0.40 / $2.00
    • Context131K
  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    QwQ 32B

    Released Mar 5, 2025

    53/100
    • ECI137.6
    • Price$0.66 / $1.00
    • Context131K
  3. Our pick

    OpenAI

    GPT-4.1 mini

    Released Apr 14, 2025

    60/100
    • ECI135.0
    • Price$0.40 / $1.60
    • Context1.05M
01 — Verdict

GPT-4.1 mini is our pick

GPT-4.1 mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against QwQ 32B (53) and Mistral Medium 3 (53). It leads on inputs & features and context window. QwQ 32B wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwQ 32BCapabilities Index (ECI): QwQ 32B 137.6 · GPT-4.1 mini 135.0 · Mistral Medium 3 134.1
  • Lowest priceGPT-4.1 miniGPT-4.1 mini $0.70 · QwQ 32B $0.745 · Mistral Medium 3 $0.80 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGPT-4.1 miniGPT-4.1 mini 1,047,576 · Mistral Medium 3 131,072 · QwQ 32B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGPT-4.1 miniMistral Medium 3: Text, Images · QwQ 32B: Text · GPT-4.1 mini: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingQwQ 32BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMistral Medium 3QwQ 32BGPT-4.1 mini
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%586259
Price25%545657
Inputs & features15%503570
Context window10%242461
Overall100%53/10053/10060/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Mistral Medium 3 vs QwQ 32B vs GPT-4.1 mini specifications side by side
SpecificationMistral Medium 3Mistral AIQwQ 32BAlibaba (Qwen)GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)134.1137.6 (best)135.0
ECI rank#117 of 148#109 of 148 (best)#115 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions59.5%65.3%65.9% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics——6.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics32.2%59.2% (best)44.7%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions——12.7%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.40 (best)$0.66$0.40 (best)
Output$2.00$1.00 (best)$1.60
Cached input——$0.10
Blended (3:1)$0.80$0.745$0.70 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Mistral APIMedian of 1 providersOfficial OpenAI API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens131,072 tokens1,047,576 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens (best)8,192 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoYes
PDFsNoNoYes
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoYesNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model IDmistral-medium-2505—gpt-4.1-mini
API providers5124 (best)
ReleasedMay 7, 2025Mar 5, 2025Apr 14, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMay 2025Apr 2024Apr 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Mistral Medium 3$8.00
  • QwQ 32B$8.60
  • GPT-4.1 mini$7.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Mistral Medium 3, QwQ 32B or GPT-4.1 mini?

GPT-4.1 mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against QwQ 32B (53) and Mistral Medium 3 (53). It leads on inputs & features and context window. QwQ 32B wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Medium 3, QwQ 32B or GPT-4.1 mini?

GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper at $0.40 input / $1.60 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). QwQ 32B costs $0.66 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Mistral Medium 3 costs $0.40 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.70 per million tokens for GPT-4.1 mini versus $0.745 for QwQ 32B (1.1× as much) and $0.80 for Mistral Medium 3 (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

QwQ 32B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): QwQ 32B 137.6 (#109 of 148), GPT-4.1 mini 135.0 (#115 of 148) and Mistral Medium 3 134.1 (#117 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (133.1–141.7 vs 131.2–136.6), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — GPT-4.1 mini 65.9%, QwQ 32B 65.3%, Mistral Medium 3 59.5%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — QwQ 32B 59.2%, GPT-4.1 mini 44.7%, Mistral Medium 3 32.2%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mistral Medium 3, QwQ 32B and GPT-4.1 mini yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, QwQ 32B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 mini has the largest context window at 1,047,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Mistral Medium 3 and 131,072 for QwQ 32B. Maximum output per response: Mistral Medium 3 up to 131,072, QwQ 32B up to 8,192, GPT-4.1 mini up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Mistral Medium 3 accepts text and images; QwQ 32B accepts text; GPT-4.1 mini accepts text, images and PDFs. GPT-4.1 mini handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

QwQ 32B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Mistral Medium 3 and GPT-4.1 mini is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Mistral Medium 3 is the newest, released May 7, 2025. GPT-4.1 mini came out Apr 14, 2025; QwQ 32B came out Mar 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Mistral Medium 3 May 2025, QwQ 32B Apr 2024, GPT-4.1 mini Apr 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.