Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-5.4
88
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B
78
Verified leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 #18 · Mistral Medium 3.5 128B unranked
Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mistral Medium 3.5 128B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Coding
+19.9 difference
GPT-5.4
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B
$2.5 / $15
$1.5 / $7.5
74 t/s
N/A
151.79s
N/A
1.05M
256K
Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mistral Medium 3.5 128B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
GPT-5.4 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 88 to 78. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.50 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.50 input / $7.50 output per 1M tokens for Mistral Medium 3.5 128B. That is roughly 2.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 256K for Mistral Medium 3.5 128B.
GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 88 to 78.
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.6 versus 57.7. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench Hard is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.