Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

See the free Radar Brief
BenchLM
Mistral logo
Model A
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Mistral

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Alibaba logo
Model B
Qwen3.7 Plus

Alibaba

62.29/100

Supported · Public rank #60

90% interval 52.4–72.2

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

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

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.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Qwen3.7 Plus

    Qwen3.7 Plus has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
0
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) only
0
Qwen3.7 Plus only
52
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

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.

Agentic

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
37.7
Supported · #126/151
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 11 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
53.1
Estimated · #51/183
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 7 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
73.7
Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
56.8
Estimated · #50/181
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 7 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
78.3
Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
78.9
#3/12
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
72.5
#18/48
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus
91.1
#17/120
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
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

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
$0.00045
Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
$0.0093
Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
$0.039
Fits in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Qwen3.7 Plus
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

256K

Qwen3.7 Plus

1M

API model ID

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Not published

Qwen3.7 Plus

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Provider availability

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Reasoning

Qwen3.7 Plus

Reasoning

Weight access

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Open Weight

Qwen3.7 Plus

Proprietary

License

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Open Weight

Qwen3.7 Plus

Proprietary

Release date

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

2026-02-20

Qwen3.7 Plus

2026-06-03

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
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Qwen3.7 Plus has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence52 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus70.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • QwenClawBench

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus61.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Claw-Eval

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus62.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BFCL v4

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus72.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus73.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VITA-Bench

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus45.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepPlanning

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus62.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld-Verified

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus73.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AndroidWorld

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus81.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus2.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus52.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus70.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus77.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus57.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus75.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus41.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus51.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus89.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • CritPt

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus9.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCRv2

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus91.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus34.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus88.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Redux

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus94.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SuperGPQA

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus71.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMLU

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus89.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus92.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IMOAnswerBench

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus86.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Apex

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus22.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus85.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NOVA-63

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus58.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • INCLUDE

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus83.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MAXIFE

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus88.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PolyMath

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus84.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus79%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus85.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ERQA

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus69.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MedXpertQA (MM)

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus71.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ScreenSpot Pro

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus79.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SimpleVQA

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus81.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMSearch-Plus

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus41.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RealWorldQA

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus86.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OmniDocBench 1.5

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus91.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OCRBench V2

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus70.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ODINW13

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus51.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME (with subtitle)

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus88.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VideoMMMU

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus85.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MLVU (M-Avg)

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus87.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus94.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)—
    Qwen3.7 Plus79.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.7 Plus?

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, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 256K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated September 4, 2026

Watch Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) vs Qwen3.7 Plus

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.