Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B

Ling 3.1 Flash costs 1.3x less per output token than Mistral Small 3.2 24B ($0.225 vs $0.30 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Replace Ling 3.1 Flash Replace Mistral Small 3.2 24B
Ling 3.1 FlashinclusionAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.225
Mistral Small 3.2 24BMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.30
vs $0.225 vs $0.30 per 1M output tokens. Ling 3.1 Flash is 1.3x cheaper.

Ling 3.1 Flash or Mistral Small 3.2 24B: which to pick

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

Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.225 vs $0.30 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 256K tokens).

Model ALing 3.1 FlashinclusionAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMistral Small 3.2 24BMistral AINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task

No benchmark has tested both yet. Ling 3.1 Flash has results on SciCode, AA Intelligence Index and Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run); Mistral Small 3.2 24B on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. 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
Ling 3.1 Flash not benchmarked, Mistral Small 3.2 24B 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
Ling 3.1 Flash $0.225 against Mistral Small 3.2 24B $0.30 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
Ling 3.1 Flash takes 262K tokens, Mistral Small 3.2 24B 256K.

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 Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashMistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
SciCode54.1%Not measuredOnly Ling 3.1 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 42 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashMistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
AA Intelligence Index41.1Not measuredOnly Ling 3.1 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashMistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)39.4%Not measuredOnly Ling 3.1 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashMistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured896Only Mistral Small 3.2 24B measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured904Only Mistral Small 3.2 24B measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured889Only Mistral Small 3.2 24B measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured929Only Mistral Small 3.2 24B measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured907Only Mistral Small 3.2 24B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
General benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashMistral Small 3.2 24BLeader
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)83.0%Not measuredOnly Ling 3.1 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 47 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

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.0002Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3.2 24B$0.0003Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.0044Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3.2 24B$0.0059Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.017Fits in one request
Mistral Small 3.2 24B$0.023Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 Flash 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 Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2 24B
SpecificationinclusionAI Ling 3.1 FlashMistral Small 3.2 24B
MakerinclusionAIMistral AI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 2, 2026June 20, 2025
Context window262K256K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.225$0.30
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Ling 3.1 Flash better than Mistral Small 3.2 24B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.225 vs $0.30 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 256K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.1 Flash or Mistral Small 3.2 24B?

Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.225 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 3.2 24B costs $0.10 and $0.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or Mistral Small 3.2 24B?

Ling 3.1 Flash, with 262K tokens against 256K.

Has any benchmark tested both Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Small 3.2 24B?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Ling 3.1 Flash has results on SciCode, AA Intelligence Index and Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run); Mistral Small 3.2 24B on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next