Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.2-Codex vs Mistral Small 3

Updated October 21, 2026. 6 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-5.2-CodexOpenAI
Coding
45.4
Overall
28.5
Output $/M
$14.00
6
Mistral Small 3Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
6.7
Output $/M
$0.08
0
vs boards won of 6 shared

Decision reading

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Mistral Small 3 has the edge where output tokens cost 175.0x less.

Shared results
6
GPT-5.2-Codex only
16
Mistral Small 3 only
30
Like-for-like categories
4 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
GPT-5.2-Codex 45.4 from 3 benchmarks, Mistral Small 3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 72.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): GPT-5.2-Codex 82.3% against Mistral Small 3 0.0%, 82.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 against Mistral Small 3 $0.08 per million output tokens, 175.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.2-Codex takes 400K tokens, Mistral Small 3 33K.

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
CategoryGPT-5.2-CodexBarsMistral Small 3Ties
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General20
All shared boards60
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index14 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev1339Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)37.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured25.2%Only Mistral Small 3 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)37.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench66.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1299.9Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1246Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1248Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1329Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1348Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
AA Intelligence Index28.56.7GPT-5.2-Codex
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 GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1051Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps993Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1089Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1176Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1142Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2-Codex measured
τ²-Bench Telecom92.1%19.6%GPT-5.2-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)89.9%46.2%GPT-5.2-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)35.7%3.8%GPT-5.2-Codex
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1233Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1202Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1243Only Mistral Small 3 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
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured4.3Only Mistral Small 3 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.3%Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1240Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1243Only Mistral Small 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured65.2%Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1235Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1215Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1219Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1205Only Mistral Small 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3Leader
IFBench77.6%26.4%GPT-5.2-Codex
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.3%0.0%GPT-5.2-Codex
LMArena TextNot measured1234Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1214Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1194Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1256Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1198Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1204Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1211Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1111Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1188Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1204Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1216Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1217Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1246Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1214Only Mistral Small 3 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1184Only Mistral Small 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
BenchmarkGPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 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

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3$0.0001Fits in one request

Mistral Small 3 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3$0.0027Exceeds the context window

Mistral Small 3 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.2-Codex$0.490Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3$0.011Exceeds the context window

Mistral Small 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 GPT-5.2-Codex and Mistral Small 3
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.2-CodexMistral Small 3
MakerOpenAIMistral AI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedJanuary 14, 2026January 30, 2025
Context window400K33K
Input $/Mtok$1.75$0.05
Output $/Mtok$14.00$0.08
Coding index45.4Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.43Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.2-Codex better than Mistral Small 3 for coding?

Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Small 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Mistral Small 3 has the edge where output tokens cost 175.0x less.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2-Codex or Mistral Small 3?

GPT-5.2-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 3 costs $0.05 and $0.08. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2-Codex or Mistral Small 3?

GPT-5.2-Codex, with 400K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2-Codex vs Mistral Small 3 comparison based on?

6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.2-Codex's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Mistral Small 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next