Code Davinci 002 vs Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3
Code Davinci 002 (2021) and Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 (2024) are agentic coding models from OpenAI and MistralAI. Code Davinci 002 ships a not-yet-sourced context window, while Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 ships a 64K-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing. The goal is to make the tradeoff clear before deeper testing.
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 is safer overall; choose Code Davinci 002 when coding workflow support matters.
Specs
| Released | 2021-08-16 | 2024-07-01 |
| Context window | — | 64K |
| Parameters | — | 8x22B |
| Architecture | decoder only | mixture of experts |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Code Davinci 002 | Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | $2/1M tokens |
| Output price | - | $2/1M tokens |
| Providers | - |
Capabilities
| Code Davinci 002 | Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | ||
| Multimodal | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Function calling | ||
| Tool use | ||
| Structured outputs | ||
| Code execution |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on function calling: Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3. Both models share the core language-model surface, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
Pricing coverage is uneven: Code Davinci 002 has no token price sourced yet and Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 has $2/1M input tokens. Provider availability is 0 tracked routes versus 1. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Code Davinci 002 when coding workflow support are central to the workload. Choose Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 when provider fit and broader provider choice are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency. For teams standardizing a stack, that distinction is often the difference between a benchmark win and a reliable deployment.
FAQ
Is Code Davinci 002 or Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 open source?
Code Davinci 002 is listed under Proprietary. Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 is listed under Apache 2.0. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for function calling, Code Davinci 002 or Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3?
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 has the clearer documented function calling signal in this comparison. If function calling is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Code Davinci 002 and Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3?
Code Davinci 002 is available on the tracked providers still being sourced. Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 is available on Replicate API. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
When should I pick Code Davinci 002 over Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3?
Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3 is safer overall; choose Code Davinci 002 when coding workflow support matters. If your workload also depends on coding workflow support, start with Code Davinci 002; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.3.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-04-18. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.