Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6 vs Mistral Medium 3

Updated October 21, 2026. 45 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GLM 4.6 Replace Mistral Medium 3
GLM 4.6Z.ai
Coding
8.8
Overall
18.5
Output $/M
$2.20
45
Mistral Medium 3Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
9.0
Output $/M
$2.00
0
vs boards won of 45 shared

Decision reading

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Mistral Medium 3 has the edge where output tokens cost 1.1x less.

Model AGLM 4.6Z.ai8.8/1002 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BMistral Medium 3Mistral AINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
45
GLM 4.6 only
21
Mistral Medium 3 only
12
Like-for-like categories
8 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 4.6 8.8 from 2 benchmarks, Mistral Medium 3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 52.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Math Index: GLM 4.6 86.0 against Mistral Medium 3 30.3, 55.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.6 $2.20 against Mistral Medium 3 $2.00 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6 takes 205K tokens, Mistral Medium 3 131K.

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 4.6BarsMistral Medium 3Ties
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math40
Knowledge50
Web design60
General190
All shared boards450
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
SWE-bench Verified68.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev1341Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Coding Index45.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)3.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)69.5%40.0%GLM 4.6
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%3.8%GLM 4.6
Terminal-Bench24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
ALE-Bench340.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding14491385GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: software and IT14551385GLM 4.6
LMArena WebDev: HTML1350Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
AA Intelligence Index18.59.0GLM 4.6
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured134.0Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1029Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1091Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1180Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.9%24.3%GLM 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
GPQA Diamond74.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%57.8%GLM 4.6
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)14.5%4.1%GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: hard prompts14401364GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: expert14321342GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14451374GLM 4.6
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1155Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1165Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
AIME92.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Math Index86.030.3GLM 4.6
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%30.3%GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: math14321353GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: mathematical work14471354GLM 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
MMLU Pro82.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)56.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.9%76.0%GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: science14561381GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551381GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: legal and government14481384GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: business and finance14161352GLM 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
Design Arena: websites11741079GLM 4.6
Design Arena: UI components11481024GLM 4.6
Design Arena: game dev11511018GLM 4.6
Design Arena: data viz11611034GLM 4.6
Design Arena: 3D11291083GLM 4.6
Design Arena: all code categories11661069GLM 4.6
Design Arena: SVG1109Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index190
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
IFBench43.4%39.3%GLM 4.6
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)54.0%31.3%GLM 4.6
DTBenchNot measured62.3%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text14401370GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: instruction following14101338GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: creative writing14121343GLM 4.6
LMArena VisionNot measured1157Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: English14491385GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: non-English14261353GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Chinese14991374GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: German14471377GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Japanese13931316GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Korean14001304GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: French14591368GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Spanish14361364GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Russian14181359GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: Polish14471371GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: multi-turn14271384GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: longer queries14221360GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: writing and language14151352GLM 4.6
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14091335GLM 4.6
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1172Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1161Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1154Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1145Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1094Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1141Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1146Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3Leader
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 4.6$0.0017Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3$0.0014Fits in one request

Mistral Medium 3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.037Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3$0.026Fits in one request

Mistral Medium 3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.142Exceeds the context window
Mistral Medium 3$0.100Exceeds the context window

Mistral Medium 3 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 4.6 and Mistral Medium 3
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6Mistral Medium 3
MakerZ.aiMistral AI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 30, 2025May 7, 2025
Context window205K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.40
Output $/Mtok$2.20$2.00
Coding index8.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6 better than Mistral Medium 3 for coding?

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Mistral Medium 3 has the edge where output tokens cost 1.1x less.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6 or Mistral Medium 3?

GLM 4.6 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3 costs $0.40 and $2.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.6 or Mistral Medium 3?

GLM 4.6, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6 vs Mistral Medium 3 comparison based on?

45 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.6's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Mistral Medium 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next