Coding
Directional only- Grok Code Fast 1
- 29.9
- Estimated · #139/151
- Mistral Small 4
- 40.9
- Estimated · #112/151
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Grok Code Fast 1 vs Mistral Small 4
Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.
0 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Share or export
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Mistral Small 4
Mistral Small 4 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Mistral Small 4
Mistral Small 4 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Grok Code Fast 1 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Mistral Small 4 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Mistral Small 4
Mistral Small 4 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Grok Code Fast 1 and Mistral Small 4 are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Grok Code Fast 1 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documented
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
1 Grok Code Fast 1 only
- Shared results
- 0
- Grok Code Fast 1 only
- 1
- Mistral Small 4 only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
3 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Knowledge
Directional only- Grok Code Fast 1
- 37.2
- Estimated · #146/183
- Mistral Small 4
- 40.8
- Estimated · #128/183
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Instruction following
Directional only- Grok Code Fast 1
- 48.4
- #85/123
- Mistral Small 4
- 57.3
- #75/123
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Agentic
Not comparable- Grok Code Fast 1
- Not ranked
- Mistral Small 4
- 37.8
- Estimated · #125/152
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Grok Code Fast 1
- 57.4
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Mistral Small 4
- 55.2
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Grok Code Fast 1
- Not ranked
- Mistral Small 4
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Grok Code Fast 1
- Not ranked
- Mistral Small 4
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Grok Code Fast 1
- Not ranked
- Mistral Small 4
- 43.7
- Unranked · 1 rankable row
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Grok Code Fast 1 | Mistral Small 4 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 29.9Estimated · #139/151 | 40.9Estimated · #112/151 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 1 vs 0 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 37.2Estimated · #146/183 | 40.8Estimated · #128/183 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 0 vs 0 public rows | Directional only |
| Instruction following | 48.4#85/123 | 57.3#75/123 | Directional onlyProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Directional only |
| Agentic | Not ranked | 37.8Estimated · #125/152 | Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 0 vs 0 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | 57.4Unranked · 2 rankable rows | 55.2Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | 43.7Unranked · 1 rankable row | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
A shared-evidence shape is not available.
BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Grok Code Fast 1
- $0.00095
- Fits in one request
- Mistral Small 4
- $0.00045
- Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Grok Code Fast 1
- $0.0145
- Fits in one request
- Mistral Small 4
- $0.0093
- Fits in one request
Mistral Small 4 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Grok Code Fast 1
- $0.059
- Fits in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
- Mistral Small 4
- $0.039
- Fits in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Mistral Small 4 has the lower modeled cost
Grok Code Fast 1 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Mistral Small 4 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGrok Code Fast 1Mistral Small 4
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Grok Code Fast 1
256K
Mistral Small 4
256K
API model ID
Grok Code Fast 1
Not sourced
Mistral Small 4
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Grok Code Fast 1
Not published
Mistral Small 4
Not published
Documented inputs
Grok Code Fast 1
Not sourced
Mistral Small 4
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Grok Code Fast 1
Not sourced
Mistral Small 4
Not sourced
Provider availability
Grok Code Fast 1
Not sourced
Mistral Small 4
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Grok Code Fast 1
Non-Reasoning
Mistral Small 4
Non-Reasoning
Weight access
Grok Code Fast 1
Proprietary
Mistral Small 4
Open Weight
License
Grok Code Fast 1
Proprietary
Mistral Small 4
Open Weight
Release date
Grok Code Fast 1
2025-08-28
Mistral Small 4
2026-02-20
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.0145 vs $0.0093. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.059 vs $0.039.
- Context tradeoff
- Both models list 256K.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Grok Code Fast 1
API / mo$1,275
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Mistral Small 4
API / mo$563
Self-host / mo$2,278
Break-even266M/day
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence1 rows
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Grok Code Fast 170.8%SourceMistral Small 4—Not directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Grok Code Fast 1 or Mistral Small 4?
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Grok Code Fast 1 or Mistral Small 4?
Mistral Small 4 scores higher for coding on the public lane, 40.9 to 29.9. Grok Code Fast 1 and Mistral Small 4 are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Grok Code Fast 1 or Mistral Small 4?
Grok Code Fast 1 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.
Which costs less, Grok Code Fast 1 or Mistral Small 4?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.00095 on Grok Code Fast 1 and $0.00045 on Mistral Small 4; repository review costs $0.0145 and $0.0093; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.059 and $0.039. Grok Code Fast 1 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Mistral Small 4 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Which has the larger context window, Grok Code Fast 1 or Mistral Small 4?
Both models list the same context window, 256K.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 10, 2026
Watch Grok Code Fast 1 vs Mistral Small 4
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.