Advertisement
Compare/GPT-4o mini vs Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

GPT-4o minivsMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

OpenAI

GPT-4o mini

Input
$0.15/M
Output
$0.6/M
Speed
154 tok/s
TTFT
0.87s
Mistral

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Input
$0.15/M
Output
$0.6/M
Speed
169 tok/s
TTFT
0.76s

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Tie
Faster (tok/s)
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Lower Latency
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Benchmarks (0-2)
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Pricing Comparison

MetricGPT-4o miniMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Input ($/M tokens)$0.15$0.15
Output ($/M tokens)$0.6$0.6
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
GPT-4o mini$0.21
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)$0.21

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
GPT-4o mini
154 tok/s
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
169 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
GPT-4o mini
0.87s
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
0.76s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.

Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. GPT-4o mini is strongest on Coding Index (11.4), Intelligence Index (6.7). Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads on Coding Index (26.6), Intelligence Index (11.5).

Speed. Throughput is comparable — 154 tok/s vs 169 tok/s — so generation speed shouldn't drive your choice here. Look at the per-benchmark wins instead.

Provider. OpenAI and Mistral sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: OpenAI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Mistral often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): GPT-4o mini costs $13.50 ($162/year); Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) costs $13.50 ($162/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): GPT-4o mini ≈ $1.95/run, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) ≈ $1.95/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): GPT-4o mini ≈ $90/run, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) ≈ $90/run.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
6.711.5
Coding Index
11.426.6
Math Index
——
GPQA Diamond
——
MMLU-Pro
——
LiveCodeBench
——
AIME 2025
——
MATH-500
——
Humanity's Last Exam
——
SciCode
——
IFBench
——
TerminalBench
——
GPT-4o mini0 wins
2 winsMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o mini or Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)?

Both models have similar pricing. Check the detailed breakdown above for input vs output token costs.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for GPT-4o mini. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) generates tokens faster at 169 tok/s vs 154 tok/s. However, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) has lower time-to-first-token (0.76s vs 0.87s).

When should I use GPT-4o mini vs Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)?

Choose based on your priorities: both are similarly priced, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) for stronger benchmark performance, and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.