Compare/Mistral Large 3 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Mistral Large 3vsQwen3.7 Plus

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

Mistral

Mistral Large 3

Input
$0.5/M
Output
$1.5/M
Speed
48 tok/s
TTFT
1.17s
Alibaba

Qwen3.7 Plus

Input
$0.4/M
Output
$1.6/M
Speed
57 tok/s
TTFT
2.23s

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Qwen3.7 Plus
Faster (tok/s)
Qwen3.7 Plus
Lower Latency
Mistral Large 3
Benchmarks (0-2)
Qwen3.7 Plus

Pricing Comparison

MetricMistral Large 3Qwen3.7 Plus
Input ($/M tokens)$0.5$0.4
Output ($/M tokens)$1.5$1.6
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Mistral Large 3$0.65
Qwen3.7 Plus$0.56

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Mistral Large 3
48 tok/s
Qwen3.7 Plus
57 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Mistral Large 3
1.17s
Qwen3.7 Plus
2.23s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Qwen3.7 Plus 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 0.9× the per-million-token cost, Mistral Large 3 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Mistral Large 3 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. Mistral Large 3 is strongest on Coding Index (20.1), Intelligence Index (15.9). Qwen3.7 Plus leads on Coding Index (55.9), Intelligence Index (39.4).

Speed. Throughput is comparable — 48 tok/s vs 57 tok/s — so generation speed shouldn't drive your choice here. Look at the per-benchmark wins instead.

Provider. Mistral and Alibaba sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Mistral tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Alibaba 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): Mistral Large 3 costs $37.50 ($450/year); Qwen3.7 Plus costs $36.00 ($432/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Mistral Large 3 ≈ $5.50/run, Qwen3.7 Plus ≈ $5.20/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Mistral Large 3 ≈ $250/run, Qwen3.7 Plus ≈ $240/run. Qwen3.7 Plus becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

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
15.939.4
Coding Index
20.155.9
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Mistral Large 30 wins
2 winsQwen3.7 Plus

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Mistral Large 3 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.70/M tokens vs $0.75/M for Mistral Large 3.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Qwen3.7 Plus wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Mistral Large 3. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Qwen3.7 Plus generates tokens faster at 57 tok/s vs 48 tok/s. Mistral Large 3 also has lower time-to-first-token (1.17s vs 2.23s).

When should I use Mistral Large 3 vs Qwen3.7 Plus?

Choose based on your priorities: Qwen3.7 Plus for lower cost, Qwen3.7 Plus for stronger benchmark performance, and Qwen3.7 Plus for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.