Phi-4-mini vs Mistral Small 3.2
Mistral Small 3.2 comes out ahead, 64 to 58 on our weighted score, though Phi-4-mini is 13% cheaper per token.
MicrosoftPhi-4-mini
58/100- ECI—
- Price$0.075 / $0.30
- Context128K
- Our pick
Mistral AIMistral Small 3.2
64/100- ECI131.7
- Price$0.10 / $0.30
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Mistral Small 3.2 is our pick
Mistral Small 3.2 is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Phi-4-mini (58). It leads on inputs & features. Phi-4-mini 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 pricePhi-4-miniPhi-4-mini $0.131 · Mistral Small 3.2 $0.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the samePhi-4-mini 128,000 · Mistral Small 3.2 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMistral Small 3.2Phi-4-mini: Text · Mistral Small 3.2: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Phi-4-mini | Mistral Small 3.2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 92 | 89 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 50 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 58/100 | 64/100 |
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 | Phi-4-miniMicrosoft | Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 131.7 |
| ECI rank | — | #123 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 49.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 30.3% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.075 (best) | $0.10 |
| Output | $0.30 | $0.30 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.131 (best) | $0.15 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Azure API | Official Mistral API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 16,384 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| 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 | phi-4-mini | mistral-small-2506 |
| API providers | 1 | 6 (best) |
| Released | Dec 11, 2024 | Jun 20, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Oct 2023 | Mar 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Phi-4-mini$1.35
- Mistral Small 3.2$1.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Phi-4-mini or Mistral Small 3.2?
Mistral Small 3.2 is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against Phi-4-mini (58). It leads on inputs & features. Phi-4-mini 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, Phi-4-mini or Mistral Small 3.2?
Phi-4-mini is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Azure API price). Mistral Small 3.2 costs $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.131 per million tokens for Phi-4-mini versus $0.15 for Mistral Small 3.2 (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Phi-4-mini has not been scored yet and Mistral Small 3.2 has an ECI of 131.7.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Phi-4-mini and Mistral Small 3.2 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?
Phi-4-mini and Mistral Small 3.2 share the same 128,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Phi-4-mini up to 4,096, Mistral Small 3.2 up to 16,384 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Phi-4-mini accepts text; Mistral Small 3.2 accepts text and images. Mistral Small 3.2 handles the widest range of inputs.
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. Phi-4-mini came out Dec 11, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Phi-4-mini Oct 2023, Mistral Small 3.2 Mar 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.
