Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | 1T | 2.4T |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | 512k | 1M |
| Benchmarks | ||
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | 61.7% | 69.3% |
AutomationBenchBusiness workflows — Tests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | 59.9% | 50.8% |
NL2Repo-BenchRepo-level code generation — Tests whether the AI can turn a natural-language requirement into working code across an entire repository, not just produce a single function or patch. Higher is better. | — | 64.9% |
SWEAtlas CodeBase QnACodebase understanding — Questions about how an unfamiliar codebase actually works — where something is handled, what a change would touch — answered by reading the repository rather than editing it. Tests understanding rather than patch-writing. Higher is better. | 59.4% | — |
QwenSWEBench V2Software engineering — Qwen's in-house coding benchmark, second version, built around complex real-world software-engineering tasks. Scores are not comparable with the first version. Higher is better. | — | 70% |
AA Coding Agent IndexAgentic coding — Artificial Analysis' overall score for coding agents, combining three coding benchmarks with what each run costs and how many tokens it burns. It rates a model paired with a particular agent harness rather than the model alone, so the same model scores differently in different tools. Higher is better. | 49.8 | — |
Terminal-Bench 4.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Version 4.0 recalibrated how much time, CPU and memory each task gets, removed eight tasks and fixed nineteen, so fewer runs fail for reasons that have nothing to do with the model. Scores are not comparable with earlier versions. Higher is better. | 28.3% | — |
Terminal-Bench 3.0Agentic terminal coding — command-line task completion (v3.0, much harder task set) | — | 29% |
JobBenchProfessional tool use — Tests the AI on professional workplace tasks that require using real work tools — the kind of multi-step jobs an office worker handles. Higher is better. | — | 64% |
CoWorkBenchLong-horizon office work — Tests long-running office tasks across fields including computer science, finance, law, medicine, and other productivity work. Higher is better. | — | 76.1% |
Toolathlon-VerifiedPersonal tool use — Tests how well the AI uses everyday personal tools and apps to get things done — a human-checked version of Toolathlon. Higher is better. | — | 73.3% |
AA-Briefcase v1.1Knowledge work — Artificial Analysis agentic office-work eval (Elo, v1.1 rating fit) | 1393 | — |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 82.7% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Mistral | Qwen |
| Release date | Oct 6 2026 | Sep 2 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Mistral Large 4vsClaude Sonnet 5.5Qwen3.8-Max-0902vsClaude Sonnet 5.5Mistral Large 4vsGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8-Max-0902vsGPT-6.1 SolMistral Large 4vsGemini 4 ArgonQwen3.8-Max-0902vsGemini 4 ArgonMistral Large 4vsMuse Spark 1.3Qwen3.8-Max-0902vsMuse Spark 1.3Mistral Large 4vsGrok 4.7Qwen3.8-Max-0902vsGrok 4.7Mistral Large 4vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashQwen3.8-Max-0902vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashFrequently asked questions
Mistral Large 4 and Qwen3.8-Max-0902 are evenly matched across the 2 benchmarks they both report (DeepSWE 1.1, AutomationBench). Qwen3.8-Max-0902 shipped 34 days before Mistral Large 4, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Mistral Large 4 has 1T parameters, while Qwen3.8-Max-0902 has 2.4T. Context windows are 512k (Mistral Large 4) vs 1M (Qwen3.8-Max-0902).
On DeepSWE 1.1, Qwen3.8-Max-0902 leads at 69.3% vs Mistral Large 4 at 61.7%. On AutomationBench, Mistral Large 4 leads at 59.9% vs Qwen3.8-Max-0902 at 50.8%.