DeepSeek-R1 vs Mistral Small 3.1
Wins 3 of 6 areas
Reasoning · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents
DeepSeek-R1 wins more areas, narrowly.Mistral Small 3.1 is cheaper and better at coding.
Scores updated · 17 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20DeepSeek-R12 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10DeepSeek-R11 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10DeepSeek-R11 of 1 test
- CodingWriting and fixing software12Mistral Small 3.12 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own01Mistral Small 3.11 of 3 tests · 2 ties
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Mistral Small 3.1 costs 95% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where DeepSeek-R1 pulls ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+35.4points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+25.4points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+15.4points ahead
Where Mistral Small 3.1 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+12.7points ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+7.1points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+1.5points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 17 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingMistral Small 3.1
- SciCodeDeepSeek-R1 by 10.538.327.8+10.5
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Mistral Small 3.1 by 7.119.126.2+7.1
- Terminal-Bench HardMistral Small 3.1 by 1.56.17.6+1.5
AgentsMistral Small 3.1
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingMistral Small 3.1 by 16.47.4+1
- GDPValtie00tie
- Terminal-Bench 4.0tie00tie
ReasoningDeepSeek-R1
- GPQA DiamondDeepSeek-R1 by 25.470.845.4+25.4
- Humanity's Last ExamDeepSeek-R1 by 4.28.54.3+4.2
- CritPttie0.60tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-R1 by 15.430.515.1+15.4
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationMistral Small 3.1 by 12.79.722.4+12.7
Following instructionsDeepSeek-R1
- IFBenchDeepSeek-R1 by 9.13929.9+9.1
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceDeepSeek-R1 by 18.5-32.2-50.8+18.5
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Mistral Small 3.1 by 13.711.425.1+13.7
- AA IntelligenceDeepSeek-R1 by 4.311.47.1+4.3
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexMistral Small 3.1 by 1.724.626.3+1.7
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-R1 or Mistral Small 3.1?
DeepSeek-R1 wins three of the six areas where both have results: reasoning, long documents and following instructions. Mistral Small 3.1 wins coding and agents, and costs 95% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Mistral Small 3.1. It wins 2 of the 3 coding tests both models report; DeepSeek-R1 wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-R1 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Mistral Small 3.1 costs $0.11 and $0.17. That makes Mistral Small 3.1 about 95% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 17 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 13 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.