Seed 1.6 Vision vs Mistral Medium 3.1 vs GLM-4.5-Air
Seed 1.6 Vision comes out ahead, 63 to 50 and 49 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
ByteDance SeedSeed 1.6 Vision
63/100- ECI—
- Price$0.119 / $1.19
- Context256K
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
Seed 1.6 Vision is our pick
Seed 1.6 Vision is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Mistral Medium 3.1 (50) and GLM-4.5-Air (49). It leads on price and inputs & features. 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 priceSeed 1.6 VisionSeed 1.6 Vision $0.386 · GLM-4.5-Air $0.425 · Mistral Medium 3.1 $0.80 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMistral Medium 3.1Mistral Medium 3.1 262,144 · Seed 1.6 Vision 256,000 · GLM-4.5-Air 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSeed 1.6 Vision and Mistral Medium 3.1Seed 1.6 Vision: Text, Images · Mistral Medium 3.1: Text, Images · GLM-4.5-Air: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-4.5-AirPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Seed 1.6 Vision | Mistral Medium 3.1 | GLM-4.5-Air |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 69 | 54 | 68 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 50 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 36 | 37 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 63/100 | 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 | Seed 1.6 VisionByteDance Seed | Mistral Medium 3.1Mistral AI | GLM-4.5-AirZ.ai (Zhipu) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.119 (best) | $0.40 | $0.20 |
| Output | $1.19 | $2.00 | $1.10 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.024 (best) | — | $0.03 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.386 (best) | $0.80 | $0.425 |
| Long-context rate | Over 32K: $0.178 / $2.37 | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Volcengine Ark API | Official Mistral API | Official Z.AI API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 256,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 32,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 98,304 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | doubao-seed-1-6-vision-250815 | mistral-medium-2508 | glm-4.5-air |
| API providers | 2 | 1 | 13 (best) |
| Released | Aug 15, 2025 | Aug 12, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | 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.
- Seed 1.6 Vision$3.56
- Mistral Medium 3.1$8.00
- GLM-4.5-Air$4.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Seed 1.6 Vision, Mistral Medium 3.1 or GLM-4.5-Air?
Seed 1.6 Vision is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against Mistral Medium 3.1 (50) and GLM-4.5-Air (49). It leads on price and inputs & features. 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, Seed 1.6 Vision, Mistral Medium 3.1 or GLM-4.5-Air?
Seed 1.6 Vision is cheaper at $0.119 input / $1.19 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). GLM-4.5-Air costs $0.20 input / $1.10 output per million tokens (official Z.AI 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 $0.386 per million tokens for Seed 1.6 Vision versus $0.425 for GLM-4.5-Air (1.1× as much) and $0.80 for Mistral Medium 3.1 (2.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Seed 1.6 Vision 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 Seed 1.6 Vision, 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?
Mistral Medium 3.1 has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 256,000 for Seed 1.6 Vision and 131,072 for GLM-4.5-Air. Maximum output per response: Seed 1.6 Vision up to 32,000, 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?
Seed 1.6 Vision accepts text and images; Mistral Medium 3.1 accepts text and images; GLM-4.5-Air accepts text. Seed 1.6 Vision handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.5-Air publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 1.6 Vision and Mistral Medium 3.1 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Seed 1.6 Vision is the newest, released Aug 15, 2025. Mistral Medium 3.1 came out Aug 12, 2025; GLM-4.5-Air came out Jul 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: 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.
