Nova Lite 1.0 vs Codestral 2508
Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 6.7
- Output $/M
- $0.24
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.90
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Nova Lite 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 3.8x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 256K tokens.
- Shared results
- 0
- Nova Lite 1.0 only
- 41
- Codestral 2508 only
- 7
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Nova Lite 1.0 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 6.7.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Codestral 2508 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1013.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Nova Lite 1.0
Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens against 256K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0
Nova Lite 1.0 $0.0002, Codestral 2508 $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Lite 1.0 not benchmarked, Codestral 2508 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- No category has a result for both models.
- Widest single gap
- No benchmark has a result for both models.
- Output price
- Nova Lite 1.0 $0.24 against Codestral 2508 $0.90 per million output tokens, 3.8x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens, Codestral 2508 256K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 16.7% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 0.8% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 137.8 | Only Codestral 2508 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1239 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1241 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 6.7 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 17.5% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 43.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.3% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1220 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1201 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1226 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 7.0 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1227 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1235 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| MMLU | 77.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1232 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1213 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1238 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1219 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1013 | Only Codestral 2508 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1017 | Only Codestral 2508 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 968 | Only Codestral 2508 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1017 | Only Codestral 2508 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1020 | Only Codestral 2508 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1007 | Only Codestral 2508 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 34.1% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1229 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1205 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1197 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Vision | 990 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1243 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1208 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1225 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1229 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1153 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1153 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1238 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1226 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1216 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1199 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1234 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1211 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1176 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 999 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Codestral 2508 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Lite 1.0 | Mistral Codestral 2508 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | Mistral AI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 5, 2024 | August 1, 2025 |
| Context window | 300K | 256K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.06 | $0.30 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.24 | $0.90 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Lite 1.0 better than Codestral 2508 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Nova Lite 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 3.8x less, and where the context window is larger, 300K against 256K tokens.
Which is cheaper, Nova Lite 1.0 or Codestral 2508?
Nova Lite 1.0 costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.24 per million output tokens; Codestral 2508 costs $0.30 and $0.90. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Lite 1.0 or Codestral 2508?
Nova Lite 1.0, with 300K tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Lite 1.0 vs Codestral 2508 comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Lite 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Codestral 2508's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.