Mistral AICodestral 22BVSMistral AIMistral Small 4
Our Take
Standardized reasoning and coding benchmarks are currently pending verification for one or both of these models. We recommend testing Codestral 22B and Mistral Small 4 directly in their respective provider playgrounds to see which fits your specific prompt styles best.
Was this recommendation helpful?
Benchmarks & Scores
Coding (human-eval)
81.1%basic standalone code completion and simple functions
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
N/Agraduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)
$0.45Input: $0.30 | Output: $0.90Context Window
32.77k tokensBenchmarks & Scores
Coding (live-code-bench)
63.6%scripting single-file apps or clearly defined functions
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
71.2%graduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)1.7x cheaper
$0.26Input: $0.15 | Output: $0.60Context WindowLarger
262.14k tokensFrequently Asked Questions about Codestral 22B vs Mistral Small 4
Mistral Small 4 is cheaper than Codestral 22B. Mistral Small 4 has a blended cost of $0.26/1M tokens, which is about 1.7x cheaper than Codestral 22B at $0.45/1M tokens.
For coding tasks, Codestral 22B scores 81.1% on human-eval (basic standalone code completion and simple functions), while Mistral Small 4 scores 63.6% on live-code-bench (scripting single-file apps or clearly defined functions).
Related Matchups
Explore similar comparisons for Codestral 22B and Mistral Small 4.
Do you want to find a model for your constraints?
Use our interactive model finder to filter LLMs by reasoning capability, coding performance, cost, and context length.