Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.5 vs Mistral Small 4

Updated October 21, 2026. 8 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GLM 4.5Z.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
12.8
Output $/M
$2.20
6
Mistral Small 4Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
11.3
Output $/M
$0.60
2
vs boards won of 8 shared

Decision reading

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

GLM 4.5 has the edge where what matters is ALE-Bench or IFBench, where it leads.

Shared results
8
GLM 4.5 only
52
Mistral Small 4 only
6
Like-for-like categories
5 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.

At a glance

Coding index
GLM 4.5 not benchmarked, Mistral Small 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 4.8 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: GLM 4.5 344.8 against Mistral Small 4 497.6, 5.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.5 $2.20 against Mistral Small 4 $0.60 per million output tokens, 3.7x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.5 takes 131K tokens, Mistral Small 4 262K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 4.5BarsMistral Small 4Ties
Coding11
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General11
All shared boards62
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
SWE-bench Verified64.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured26.6Only Mistral Small 4 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)67.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)73.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
SciCodeNot measured38.8%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.0%17.4%GLM 4.5
WeirdML40.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
ALE-Bench344.8497.6Mistral Small 4
LMArena Text: coding1434Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1440Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
AA Intelligence Index12.811.3GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured0.8Only Mistral Small 4 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom43.0%41.2%GLM 4.5
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
GPQA Diamond72.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.2%76.9%GLM 4.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%9.9%GLM 4.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts1429Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: expert1433Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1429Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
AIME86.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)94.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AA Math Index73.7Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: math1427Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1430Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
MMLU Pro81.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)75.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)90.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: science1444Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1455Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1438Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1420Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
Design Arena: websites1170Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1144Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1145Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1159Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1170Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1165Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
IFBench44.1%48.2%Mistral Small 4
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%49.7%GLM 4.5
DTBenchNot measured70.9%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
LMCANot measured20.6%Only Mistral Small 4 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)73.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text1430Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1404Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1395Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: English1437Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1417Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1465Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: German1407Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1415Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1380Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: French1418Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1454Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1413Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1422Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1415Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1412Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1403Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1404Not measuredOnly GLM 4.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
BenchmarkGLM 4.5Mistral Small 4Leader
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

GLM 4.5$0.0017Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4$0.0004Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.037Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4$0.0093Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.5$0.142Exceeds the context window
Mistral Small 4$0.036Fits in one request

Mistral Small 4 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 GLM 4.5 and Mistral Small 4
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.5Mistral Small 4
MakerZ.aiMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 25, 2025March 16, 2026
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.15
Output $/Mtok$2.20$0.60
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.5 better than Mistral Small 4 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GLM 4.5 has the edge where what matters is ALE-Bench or IFBench, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.5 or Mistral Small 4?

GLM 4.5 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 4 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.5 or Mistral Small 4?

Mistral Small 4, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.5 vs Mistral Small 4 comparison based on?

8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.5's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Mistral Small 4's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next