Compare/o3 vs Mistral Medium

o3vsMistral Medium

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

OpenAI

o3

Input
$2/M
Output
$8/M
Speed
109 tok/s
TTFT
6.22s
Mistral

Mistral Medium

Input
$1.5/M
Output
$7.5/M
Speed
127 tok/s
TTFT
2.26s

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Mistral Medium
Faster (tok/s)
Mistral Medium
Lower Latency
Mistral Medium
Benchmarks (1-0)
o3

Pricing Comparison

Metrico3Mistral Medium
Input ($/M tokens)$2$1.5
Output ($/M tokens)$8$7.5
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
o3$2.80
Mistral Medium$2.25

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
o3
109 tok/s
Mistral Medium
127 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
o3
6.22s
Mistral Medium
2.26s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. o3 wins the overall benchmark matchup 1–0 across 1 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.

Pricing. Both models sit in the mid-tier bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.1× the per-million-token cost, Mistral Medium is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Mistral Medium makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. o3 is strongest on Intelligence Index (31.1). Mistral Medium leads on Intelligence Index (3.2).

Speed. Throughput is comparable — 109 tok/s vs 127 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): o3 costs $180.00 ($2160/year); Mistral Medium costs $157.50 ($1890/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): o3 ≈ $26.00/run, Mistral Medium ≈ $22.50/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): o3 ≈ $1200/run, Mistral Medium ≈ $1050/run. Mistral Medium 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
31.13.2
Coding Index
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
o31 wins
0 winsMistral Medium

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, o3 or Mistral Medium?

Mistral Medium is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $3.00/M tokens vs $3.50/M for o3.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

o3 wins 1 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Mistral Medium. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Mistral Medium generates tokens faster at 127 tok/s vs 109 tok/s. However, Mistral Medium has lower time-to-first-token (2.26s vs 6.22s).

When should I use o3 vs Mistral Medium?

Choose based on your priorities: Mistral Medium for lower cost, o3 for stronger benchmark performance, and Mistral Medium for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.