ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Mistral Small 3.2 vs Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct

Too close to call on our weighted score (Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 62, Mistral Small 3.2 60). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Mistral AI

    Mistral Small 3.2

    Released Jun 20, 2025

    60/100
    • ECI131.7
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context128K
  2. Meta

    Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct

    Released Apr 5, 2025

    62/100
    • ECI129.7
    • Price$0.225 / $0.69
    • Context10M
  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 62/100, Mistral Small 3.2 60/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mistral Small 3.2 for raw capability and Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityMistral Small 3.2Capabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Small 3.2 131.7 · Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 129.7
  • Lowest priceMistral Small 3.2Mistral Small 3.2 $0.15 · Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct $0.341 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLlama 4 Scout 17B InstructLlama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 10,000,000 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsMistral Small 3.2: Text, Images · Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMistral Small 3.2Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5552
Price25%8972
Inputs & features15%5050
Context window10%24100
Overall100%60/10062/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Mistral Small 3.2 vs Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationMistral Small 3.2Mistral AILlama 4 Scout 17B InstructMeta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)131.7 (best)129.7
ECI rank#123 of 148 (best)#126 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions49.1%51.8% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics30.3% (best)7.8%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.225
Output$0.30 (best)$0.69
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.15 (best)$0.341
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Mistral APIMedian of 4 providers
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens10,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model IDmistral-small-2506—
API providers6 (best)4
ReleasedJun 20, 2025Apr 5, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMar 2025Aug 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 Small 3.2$1.60
  • Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct$3.63
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Mistral Small 3.2 or Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 62/100, Mistral Small 3.2 60/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mistral Small 3.2 for raw capability and Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Small 3.2 or Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct costs $0.225 input / $0.69 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Mistral Small 3.2 versus $0.341 for Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct (2.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Mistral Small 3.2 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Mistral Small 3.2 131.7 (#123 of 148) and Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 129.7 (#126 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (126.6–133.9 vs 124.8–131.4), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 51.8%, Mistral Small 3.2 49.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Mistral Small 3.2 30.3%, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct 7.8%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mistral Small 3.2 and Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Mistral Small 3.2 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?

Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct has the largest context window at 10,000,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Mistral Small 3.2. Maximum output per response: Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images; Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct accepts text and images. 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?

Mistral Small 3.2 is the newest, released Jun 20, 2025. Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct came out Apr 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Mistral Small 3.2 Mar 2025, Llama 4 Scout 17B Instruct Aug 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.