Model Comparison
Pixtral Large
vs. Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Mistral, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
MiPixtral Large7 metric winsStrongest on: Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA
Lowest Price
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Pixtral Large
20.7 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning)
0.0 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Pixtral Large.
Reasoning gap
Pixtral Large leads Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning) by 14.8 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Pixtral Large wins 7 measurable categories, including Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA, HLE.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Pixtral Large
Mistral
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Mi Pixtral Large | Al Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $2.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $6.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.00/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Mistral | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Nov 18, 2024 | Mar 2, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | — |
| TTFT | — | — |
| Latency | — | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 20.7 | 5.9 |
| Intelligence | 8.1 | 5.5 |
| Coding | — | 0.0 |
| Math | 2.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 50.5% | 11.1% |
| MMLU Pro | 70.1% | — |
| HLE | 3.6% | 1.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 26.1% | — |
| MATH 500 | 71.4% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 2.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 7.0% | — |
| SciCode | 29.2% | 0.0% |
| LCR | 10.3% | 5.3% |
| IFBench | 34.5% | 21.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 36.5% | 47.7% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 0.0% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Pixtral Large has the strongest reasoning profile with a 20.7 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning) reaches a 0.0 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Pixtral Large
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
