Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
Mistral Medium 3
~53
Winner · 1/8 categoriesSarvam 30B
48
2/8 categoriesMistral Medium 3· Sarvam 30B
Pick Mistral Medium 3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Sarvam 30B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Mistral Medium 3 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 53 to 48. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Mistral Medium 3's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 91 against 86.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MATH-500, 91% to 97%. Sarvam 30B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Mistral Medium 3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.40 input / $2.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Sarvam 30B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Sarvam 30B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Mistral Medium 3 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Mistral Medium 3 gives you the larger context window at 128K, compared with 64K for Sarvam 30B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | Mistral Medium 3 | Sarvam 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| BrowseComp | — | 35.5% |
| CodingSarvam 30B wins | ||
| HumanEval | 92.1% | 92.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 30.3% | — |
| LiveCodeBench v6 | — | 70.0% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 34% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| gpqaDiamond | — | 66.5% |
| KnowledgeSarvam 30B wins | ||
| GPQA | 57.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.2% | 80% |
| MMLU | — | 85.1% |
| Instruction Following | ||
| IFEval | 89.4% | — |
| Multilingual | ||
| Coming soon | ||
| MathematicsMistral Medium 3 wins | ||
| MATH-500 | 91% | 97% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 80% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 73.3% |
| HMMT Nov 2025 | — | 74.2% |
Mistral Medium 3 is ahead overall, 53 to 48. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MATH-500, where the scores are 91% and 97%.
Sarvam 30B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 80 versus 70.1. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Sarvam 30B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 34 versus 30.3. Mistral Medium 3 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Mistral Medium 3 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 91 versus 86.5. Inside this category, MATH-500 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.