Qwen3 Coder Flash vs Mistral Medium 3.1 vs GLM-4.5-Air
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3 Coder Flash 50, Mistral Medium 3.1 50, GLM-4.5-Air 49). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 Coder Flash
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.50
- Context1M
Mistral AIMistral Medium 3.1
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.40 / $2.00
- Context262K
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.5-Air
49/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $1.10
- Context131K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3 Coder Flash 50/100, Mistral Medium 3.1 50/100, GLM-4.5-Air 49/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.5-Air on price and Qwen3 Coder Flash for long inputs. 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 priceGLM-4.5-AirGLM-4.5-Air $0.425 · Qwen3 Coder Flash $0.60 · Mistral Medium 3.1 $0.80 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3 Coder FlashQwen3 Coder Flash 1,000,000 · Mistral Medium 3.1 262,144 · GLM-4.5-Air 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsMistral Medium 3.1Qwen3 Coder Flash: Text · Mistral Medium 3.1: Text, Images · GLM-4.5-Air: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-4.5-AirPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3 Coder Flash | Mistral Medium 3.1 | GLM-4.5-Air |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 60 | 54 | 68 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 50 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 37 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 50/100 | 50/100 | 49/100 |
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 | Qwen3 Coder FlashAlibaba (Qwen) | Mistral Medium 3.1Mistral AI | GLM-4.5-AirZ.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.40 | $0.20 (best) |
| Output | $1.50 | $2.00 | $1.10 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | $0.03 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.60 | $0.80 | $0.425 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Mistral API | Official Z.AI API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 98,304 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3-coder-flash | mistral-medium-2508 | glm-4.5-air |
| API providers | 10 | 1 | 13 (best) |
| Released | Jul 28, 2025 | Aug 12, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | May 2025 | Apr 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen3 Coder Flash$6.00
- Mistral Medium 3.1$8.00
- GLM-4.5-Air$4.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3 Coder Flash, Mistral Medium 3.1 or GLM-4.5-Air?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3 Coder Flash 50/100, Mistral Medium 3.1 50/100, GLM-4.5-Air 49/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.5-Air on price and Qwen3 Coder Flash for long inputs. 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, Qwen3 Coder Flash, Mistral Medium 3.1 or GLM-4.5-Air?
GLM-4.5-Air is cheaper at $0.20 input / $1.10 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Qwen3 Coder Flash costs $0.30 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Mistral Medium 3.1 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 $0.425 per million tokens for GLM-4.5-Air versus $0.60 for Qwen3 Coder Flash (1.4× as much) and $0.80 for Mistral Medium 3.1 (1.9× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen3 Coder Flash has not been scored yet, Mistral Medium 3.1 has not been scored yet and GLM-4.5-Air has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 Coder Flash, Mistral Medium 3.1 and GLM-4.5-Air 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?
Qwen3 Coder Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Mistral Medium 3.1 and 131,072 for GLM-4.5-Air. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 Coder Flash up to 65,536, Mistral Medium 3.1 up to 262,144, GLM-4.5-Air up to 98,304 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3 Coder Flash accepts text; Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts text and images; GLM-4.5-Air accepts text. Mistral Medium 3.1 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.5-Air publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3 Coder Flash and Mistral Medium 3.1 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Mistral Medium 3.1 is the newest, released Aug 12, 2025. Qwen3 Coder Flash came out Jul 28, 2025; GLM-4.5-Air came out Jul 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 Coder Flash Apr 2025, Mistral Medium 3.1 May 2025, GLM-4.5-Air Apr 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.
