Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Codestral 2508 vs Mistral Nemo

Updated October 21, 2026. No benchmark has tested both models yet. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Codestral 2508Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.90
Mistral NemoMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
vs $0.90 vs $0.15 per 1M output tokens. Mistral Nemo is 6.0x cheaper.

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Codestral 2508 has the edge where the context window is larger, 256K against 131K tokens.

No benchmark has tested both yet. Codestral 2508 has results on ALE-Bench, Design Arena: websites and Design Arena: UI components; Mistral Nemo on Epoch Capabilities Index, MMLU and DTBench. Compare them on price and context instead.

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.

At a glance

Coding index
Codestral 2508 not benchmarked, Mistral Nemo not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Codestral 2508 $0.90 against Mistral Nemo $0.15 per million output tokens, 6.0x apart.
Context window
Codestral 2508 takes 256K tokens, Mistral Nemo 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index1 board measured
Coding benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Mistral Nemo
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Mistral NemoLeader
ALE-Bench137.8Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Mistral Nemo
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Mistral NemoLeader
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured118.7Only Mistral Nemo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Mistral Nemo
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Mistral NemoLeader
MMLUNot measured65.3%Only Mistral Nemo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Mistral Nemo
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Mistral NemoLeader
Design Arena: websites1013Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: UI components1017Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: game dev968Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: data viz1017Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: 3D1020Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1007Not measuredOnly Codestral 2508 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
General benchmarks for Codestral 2508 and Mistral Nemo
BenchmarkCodestral 2508Mistral NemoLeader
DTBenchNot measured48.6%Only Mistral Nemo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 45 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

Codestral 2508$0.0008Fits in one request
Mistral Nemo$0.0002Fits in one request

Mistral Nemo costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.018Fits in one request
Mistral Nemo$0.0080Fits in one request

Mistral Nemo costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Codestral 2508$0.069Fits in one request
Mistral Nemo$0.032Exceeds the context window

Mistral Nemo 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.

Specifications of Codestral 2508 and Mistral Nemo
SpecificationMistral Codestral 2508Mistral Nemo
MakerMistral AIMistral AI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 1, 2025July 19, 2024
Context window256K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.15
Output $/Mtok$0.90$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Codestral 2508 better than Mistral Nemo for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Codestral 2508 has the edge where the context window is larger, 256K against 131K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Codestral 2508 or Mistral Nemo?

Codestral 2508 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Mistral Nemo costs $0.15 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Codestral 2508 or Mistral Nemo?

Codestral 2508, with 256K tokens against 131K.

Has any benchmark tested both Codestral 2508 and Mistral Nemo?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Codestral 2508 has results on ALE-Bench, Design Arena: websites and Design Arena: UI components; Mistral Nemo on Epoch Capabilities Index, MMLU and DTBench. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next