Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mistral Nemo vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B

Mistral Nemo costs 40.0x less per output token than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B ($0.15 vs $6.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Mistral NemoMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$6.00
vs $0.15 vs $6.00 per 1M output tokens. Mistral Nemo is 40.0x cheaper.

Mistral Nemo or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: which to pick

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

Pick Mistral Nemo for output tokens 40.0x cheaper ($0.15 vs $6.00 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mistral Nemo has results on Epoch Capabilities Index, MMLU and DTBench; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on AA Coding Index, SciCode and AA Intelligence Index. 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
Mistral Nemo not benchmarked, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 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
Mistral Nemo $0.15 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $6.00 per million output tokens, 40.0x apart.
Context window
Mistral Nemo takes 131K tokens, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 1.05M.

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 Index2 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured71.9Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
SciCodeNot measured54.1%Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured39.9Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Epoch Capabilities Index118.7Not measuredOnly Mistral Nemo measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured50.1Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured93.5%Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured42.4%Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
MMLU65.3%Not measuredOnly Mistral Nemo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
General benchmarks for Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
BenchmarkMistral NemoQwen3.8 2.4T A95BLeader
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured80.3%Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured
DTBench48.6%Not measuredOnly Mistral Nemo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 44 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

Mistral Nemo$0.0002Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.0050Fits in one request

Mistral Nemo costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mistral Nemo$0.0080Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.118Fits in one request

Mistral Nemo costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mistral Nemo$0.032Exceeds the context window
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$0.460Fits in one request

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 Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
SpecificationMistral NemoQwen3.8 2.4T A95B
MakerMistral AIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 19, 2024August 12, 2026
Context window131K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.15$2.00
Output $/Mtok$0.15$6.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mistral Nemo better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mistral Nemo for output tokens 40.0x cheaper ($0.15 vs $6.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Mistral Nemo or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

Mistral Nemo costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 and $6.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mistral Nemo or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

Has any benchmark tested both Mistral Nemo and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mistral Nemo has results on Epoch Capabilities Index, MMLU and DTBench; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on AA Coding Index, SciCode and AA Intelligence Index. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next