GLM 5.2 vs Mistral Medium 3.1 (Comparative Analysis)
Loading comparison form...
Comparative Analysis: GLM 5.2 vs. Mistral Medium 3.1
Want to try out these models side by side?Try Magica for free
Overview
Mistral Medium 3.1 was released 10 months before GLM 5.2.
Model Provider The organization behind this AI's development | ||
Input Context Window Maximum input tokens this model can process at once | 1M tokens | 131.1K tokens |
Output Token Limit Maximum output tokens this model can generate at once | 131.1K tokens | Not specified tokens |
Release Date When this model first became publicly available | June 16, 2026 1 month ago June 16th, 2026 | August 13, 2025 12 months ago August 13th, 2025 |
Knowledge Cutoff Latest training-data date reported by the provider | Not reported | June 30, 2025 |
Capabilities & Features
Compare supported features, modalities, and advanced capabilities
GLM 5.2 | Mistral Medium 3.1 | |
|---|---|---|
Input Types Supported input formats | 📝Text | 📝Text🖼️Image📁File |
Reasoning Controls Defaults and configurable reasoning effort | Enabled by defaultEffort: Extra High, HighDefault: High | Not reported |
Output Types Supported output formats | 📝Text | 📝Text |
Tokenizer Text encoding system | Other | Mistral |
Key Features Advanced capabilities | ✓Function Calling✓Structured Output✓Reasoning ModeContent Moderation | ✓Function Calling✓Structured OutputReasoning ModeContent Moderation |
Open Source Model availability | Available on HuggingFace → | Proprietary |
Pricing
GLM 5.2 is roughly 0.9x less expensive compared to Mistral Medium 3.1 for input tokens and roughly 0.6x less expensive for output tokens.
Input Token Cost Cost per million input tokens | $0.38 per million tokens | $0.40 per million tokens |
Output Token Cost Cost per million output tokens | $1.19 per million tokens | $2.00 per million tokens |
Cache Read Cost Cost to reuse cached input tokens | $0.07 per million tokens | $0.04 per million tokens |
Benchmarks
Compare relevant benchmarks between GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3.1.
Intelligence Index Overall model quality across independent evaluations | 52.6 (Artificial Analysis index; higher is better) | 14.7 (Artificial Analysis index; higher is better) |
Coding Index Programming performance across independent evaluations | 68.8 (Artificial Analysis index; higher is better) | 20.5 (Artificial Analysis index; higher is better) |
Agentic Index Ability to complete multi-step agentic tasks | 45.7 (Artificial Analysis index; higher is better) | 6.1 (Artificial Analysis index; higher is better) |
Best Design Arena Score Highest human-preference Elo score across design arenas | 1,362 Elo (#4 in 3D (59.7% win rate)) | 1,173 Elo (#63 in Data Viz (47.3% win rate)) |
At a Glance
Quick overview of what makes GLM 5.2 and Mistral Medium 3.1 unique.
Explore More Comparisons
Compare your models with top performers across different categories
Compare GLM 5.2 with:
🚀Programming
Best models for coding and development
🎨Creative & Roleplay
Models optimized for creative writing
📢Marketing
Content creation and marketing tasks
💻Technology
Technical analysis and explanations
🔬Science
Scientific research and analysis
🌐Translation
Multilingual translation tasks
Compare Mistral Medium 3.1 with:
🚀Programming
Best models for coding and development
🎨Creative & Roleplay
Models optimized for creative writing
📢Marketing
Content creation and marketing tasks
💻Technology
Technical analysis and explanations
🔬Science
Scientific research and analysis
🌐Translation
Multilingual translation tasks