Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Mistral Medium 3.5 128B
At a Glance
| Compare |  Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind |  Mistral Medium 3.5 128BMistral AI |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $1.25Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | Not reported |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $10.00Google AI ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 | Not reported |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,049K | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 29, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,457.77100% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro; 95% CI [1455.30542635, 1460.23799206]; votes 122554; rank 36 | 1,420.5897% of row best · rating · mistral-medium-3.5; 95% CI [1414.04225396, 1427.11615611]; votes 10996; rank 104 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,262.17100% of row best · rating · gemini-2.5-pro; 95% CI [1257.50456844, 1266.82595195]; votes 87635; rank 45 | 1,222.0597% of row best · rating · mistral-medium-3.5; 95% CI [1212.30064904, 1231.79518832]; votes 5090; rank 71 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 2 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Mistral AI |
| Family | Gemini 2 5 | Mistral Medium 3 5 128b |
| Model | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
| Version | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Mistral-Medium-3.5-128B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-01-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video, Audio, Document | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,049K | 262K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 127.7B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | other |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Unknown |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard) | Unknown |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Gemini 2.5 Pro Capabilities
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | family variantstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Mistral Medium 3.5 128B FAQs
Is Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 2.5 Pro and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a directly sourced input price: $1.25 per million tokens. Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a directly sourced output price: $10.00 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Gemini 2.5 Pro has the larger sourced context window. Gemini 2.5 Pro supports 1,049K and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B supports 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B be self-hosted?+
Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemini 2.5 Pro is not marked open weight; Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is open weight.
Can Gemini 2.5 Pro and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B understand images?+
Gemini 2.5 Pro is documented with image input; Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 2.5 Pro is 66K and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B is —.
Do Gemini 2.5 Pro and Mistral Medium 3.5 128B support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemini 2.5 Pro: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Mistral Medium 3.5 128B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
Gemini 2.5 Pro has 2 sourced provider routes; Mistral Medium 3.5 128B has 0, so Gemini 2.5 Pro has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemini 2.5 Pro or Mistral Medium 3.5 128B?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.