Skip to main content

Llama 3.1 405B vs Mistral Small 3.2

Compare Meta (via Together AI) and Mistral AI AI models

Meta (via Together AI)
Llama 3.1 405B
vs
Mistral AI
Mistral Small 3.2

Cost Comparison (1000 input + 500 output tokens, 100 requests/day)

Llama 3.1 405B

Per Request:$0.005250
Daily:$0.525
Monthly:$15.75
Yearly:$191.625

Mistral Small 3.2

Per Request:$0.000150
Daily:$0.015
Monthly:$0.45
Yearly:$5.475

Cost Differences

$0.005100
Per Request
$0.51
Daily
$15.30
Monthly
$186.15
Yearly

Mistral Small 3.2 costs less than Llama 3.1 405B

Feature Comparison

FeatureLlama 3.1 405BMistral Small 3.2
ProviderMeta (via Together AI)Mistral AI
Input Price$3.50/1M tokens$0.06/1M tokens
Output Price$3.50/1M tokens$0.18/1M tokens
Context Window128,000 tokens128,000 tokens
Max Output32,768 tokens8,192 tokens
Categoryflagshipefficient
Capabilities
textcodereasoning
textcode
Release Date7/23/202412/2/2025

Llama 3.1 405B vs Mistral Small 3.2: Which Should You Choose?

Choosing between Llama 3.1 405B and Mistral Small 3.2 depends on your priorities: cost efficiency, context length, or raw capability. Mistral Small 3.2 is the more affordable option at $0.06/1M input tokens98% cheaper than Llama 3.1 405B.

These models come from different providers — Meta (via Together AI) and Mistral AI — which means different API ecosystems, SDKs, rate limits, and terms of service. If you're already integrated with Meta (via Together AI), switching to Mistral AIinvolves migration effort beyond just pricing. Factor in your existing infrastructure when deciding.

These models target different tiers: Llama 3.1 405B is a flagship model while Mistral Small 3.2 is efficient. This means they're optimized for different workloads. Llama 3.1 405B is built for complex tasks that require deeper reasoning, while Mistral Small 3.2 offers better value for routine operations.

Output costs matter too. Llama 3.1 405B charges $3.50/1M output tokens vs $0.18 for Mistral Small 3.2. For generation-heavy workloads (content creation, code generation, summarization), output pricing often dominates your bill. Mistral Small 3.2 has the edge here at $0.18/1M output tokens.

Best Use Cases

Choose Llama 3.1 405B when:

  • • You need more capabilities (reasoning)
  • • You need longer outputs (up to 32,768 tokens)
  • • You're already using Meta (via Together AI)'s API ecosystem

Choose Mistral Small 3.2 when:

  • • Budget is a primary concern
  • • You're already using Mistral AI's API ecosystem
  • • You're running high-volume, latency-sensitive workloads

Try Different Scenarios

Use the calculator below to see how costs change with different usage patterns

Llama 3.1 405B (Meta (via Together AI))

Mistral Small 3.2 (Mistral AI)

Start using Llama 3.1 405B today

Sign Up for Meta (via Together AI)

Start using Mistral Small 3.2 today

Sign Up for Mistral AI

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 405B or Mistral Small 3.2?
Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper for input tokens at $0.06 per million tokens vs $3.50 for Llama 3.1 405B — that's 98% savings on input costs.
What is the context window difference between Llama 3.1 405B and Mistral Small 3.2?
Llama 3.1 405B supports 128,000 tokens while Mistral Small 3.2 supports 128,000 tokens — a difference of 0 tokens in favor of Llama 3.1 405B.
Which model is better for AI Chatbot?
Both models support text. For ai chatbot, Mistral Small 3.2 is the lower-cost option, while Llama 3.1 405B offers a larger context window (128,000 vs 128,000 tokens). Choose Mistral Small 3.2 for budget sensitivity or Llama 3.1 405B for longer context tasks.
Which model has better overall pricing for heavy usage?
At 100 requests/day with 1,000 input and 500 output tokens each, Llama 3.1 405B costs about $15.75/month and Mistral Small 3.2 costs about $0.45/month. Overall, Mistral Small 3.2 has lower combined input + output rates ($0.06 in, $0.18 out) vs Llama 3.1 405B.

Related Comparisons

Related Articles