vakati-tech.ai

// head_to_head

Mistral Large 4 vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here.

Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

mistralai

Mistral Large 4

Blended / 1M
$1.05
Context
1.0M
Released
Oct 6, 2026
Overall score
43.9
reasoningtool callingimage inputprompt caching

qwen

Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20

Blended / 1M
$0.675
Context
1M
Released
Apr 27, 2026
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningtool callingimage inputvideo input

Specs and pricing

MetricMistral Large 4Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
LiveBench overall

Weighted mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

43.9—
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.0162—
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$1.05$0.675win
Input price / 1M$0.700$0.300win
Output price / 1M$2.10$1.80win
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.070—
Context window1.0M1M
Max output tokens262Kwin66K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — Mistral Large 4 on top, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 below, both out of 100.

Long-horizon agentic
8.8
—
Coding
60.0
—
Reasoning
83.9
—
Browser
0.6
—
Data analysis
76.5
—
Research
28.1
—
Documents & design
65.6
—

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadMistral Large 4Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$290.64/mo$216.00/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$434.00/mo$348.00/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$375.20/mo$384.00/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$826.00/mo$435.00/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$1,645/mo$930.00/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You are cost-constrained

Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20

Cheaper on blended list price at $0.675 per million tokens.

Mistral Large 4 vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 FAQ

Which is better, Mistral Large 4 or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20?

Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 is the cheaper of the two; neither can be ranked on quality here. Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is Mistral Large 4 cheaper than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20?

Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 is cheaper. On a 3:1 input:output blend, Mistral Large 4 lists at $1.05 per million tokens and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 at $0.675 — Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 is 1.6× cheaper. Input and output are priced separately — Mistral Large 4 charges $0.700 in and $2.10 out, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 charges $0.300 and $1.80 — so the model that looks cheaper flips depending on how output-heavy your workload is.

Does Mistral Large 4 or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 have a bigger context window?

They are effectively the same — 1.0M for Mistral Large 4 and 1M for Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20.

Do Mistral Large 4 and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 support prompt caching?

Mistral Large 4 publishes a cached-input rate of $0.070 per million tokens against a full input rate of $0.700. The catalogue lists no separate cached rate for Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20, which means the provider does not price it separately here — not that caching is unavailable.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • Scores — LiveBench release 2026-10-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.