Jamba Large 1.7 vs Mistral Medium 3.1
| Signal | Jamba Large 1.7 | Delta | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 50 | -17 | |
Pricing | 92 | -6 | |
Context window size | 86 | +5 | |
Recency | 66 | -1 | |
Output Capacity | 60 | +40 | |
| Overall Result | 2 wins | of 5 | 3 wins |
Score History
40
current score
Tied
right now
40
current score
Jamba Large 1.7
AI21 Labs
Mistral Medium 3.1
Mistral AI
Mistral Medium 3.1 saves you $460.00/month
That's $5520.00/year compared to Jamba Large 1.7 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Jamba Large 1.7 | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 40 | -- |
| Rank | #323 | #322 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
| Quality Rank | #323 | #322 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
| Adoption Rank | #323 | #322 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 256K | 131K | Jamba Large 1.7 |
| Pricing | $2.00/$8.00/M | $0.40/$2.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 50 | 67 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
| Pricing | 92 | 98 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
| Context window size | 86 | 81 | Jamba Large 1.7 |
| Recency | 66 | 67 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
| Output Capacity | 60 | 20 | Jamba Large 1.7 |
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 40/100 (rank #323), placing it in the top -11% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #322), placing it in the top -11% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Choose Jamba Large 1.7 when you need:
- Processing long documents or large codebases (256K token context)
- Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Choose Mistral Medium 3.1 when you need:
- High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
- Multimodal workflows that require image understanding
Mistral Medium 3.1 offers 76% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $36.00/month with Mistral Medium 3.1 vs $150.00/month with Jamba Large 1.7 - a $114.00 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 3.1 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (256K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($2.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (40/100) 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
Jamba Large 1.7 and Mistral Medium 3.1 are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
Jamba Large 1.7
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Mistral Medium 3.1
76% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Jamba Large 1.7
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Jamba Large 1.7
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Jamba Large 1.7
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by AI21 Labs
- 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
| Capability | Jamba Large 1.7 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Jamba Large 1.7
AI21 Labs
Mistral Medium 3.1
Mistral AI
Mistral Medium 3.1 saves you $10.08/month
That's 76% cheaper than Jamba Large 1.7 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 | Jamba Large 1.7 | Mistral Medium 3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 256K | 131K |
| Max Output Tokens | 4,096 | -- |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Created | Aug 8, 2025 | Aug 13, 2025 |