Command A vs Mistral Medium 3.5
| Signal | Command A | Delta | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 33 | -50 | |
Benchmarks | 51 | -19 | |
Pricing | 90 | -2 | |
Context window size | 86 | 0 | |
Recency | 40 | -60 | |
Output Capacity | 65 | +45 | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 6 | 5 wins |
Score History
50.8
current score
Mistral Medium 3.5
right now
71.7
current score
Command A
Cohere
Mistral Medium 3.5
Mistral AI
Mistral Medium 3.5 saves you $225.00/month
That's $2700.00/year compared to Command A at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Command A | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 51 | 72 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Rank | #226 | #153 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Quality Rank | #226 | #153 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Adoption Rank | #226 | #153 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 256K | 262K | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Pricing | $2.50/$10.00/M | $1.50/$7.50/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 33 | 83 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Benchmarks | 51 | 70 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Pricing | 90 | 93 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Context window size | 86 | 86 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Recency | 40 | 100 | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
| Output Capacity | 65 | 20 | Command A |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 51/100 (rank #226), placing it in the top 22% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 72/100 (rank #153), placing it in the top 48% of all 290 models tracked.
Mistral Medium 3.5 has a 21-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Choose Command A when you need:
- Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Choose Mistral Medium 3.5 when you need:
- Multimodal workflows that require image understanding
- Agentic applications using tool/function calling
- Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
Mistral Medium 3.5 offers 28% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $135.00/month with Mistral Medium 3.5 vs $187.50/month with Command A - a $52.50 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Mistral Medium 3.5 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (262K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($7.50/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (72/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Mistral Medium 3.5 clearly outperforms Command A with a significant 20.900000000000006-point lead. For most general use cases, Mistral Medium 3.5 is the stronger choice. However, Command A may still excel in niche scenarios.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
Command A
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Mistral Medium 3.5
28% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Command A
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Command A
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Command A
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Cohere
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
- Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
- Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Mistral AI
- Choose for Cost - 28% lower pricing; better value at scale
| Capability | Command A | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoningdiffers | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Command A
Cohere
Mistral Medium 3.5
Mistral AI
Mistral Medium 3.5 saves you $4.80/month
That's 29% cheaper than Command A at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Command A | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 256K | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | 8,192 | -- |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Created | Mar 13, 2025 | Apr 30, 2026 |