LLM Reference

Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Qwen3.5-9B

Mistral Medium 3.5 (2026) and Qwen3.5-9B (2026) are frontier reasoning models from MistralAI and Alibaba. Mistral Medium 3.5 ships a 256K-token context window, while Qwen3.5-9B ships a 262K-token context window. On MMLU PRO, Qwen3.5-9B leads by 2.7 pts. On pricing, Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10/1M input tokens versus $1.50/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.

Qwen3.5-9B is ~1400% cheaper at $0.10/1M; pay for Mistral Medium 3.5 only for reasoning depth.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3.5-9B
Best forreasoning-heavy apps, multimodal apps, and tool-calling agentsmultimodal apps, tool-calling agents, and provider-routed production
Decision fitCoding, RAG, and AgentsRAG, Agents, and Long context
Context window256K262K
Cheapest output$7.50/1M tokens$0.15/1M tokens
Provider routes3 tracked3 tracked
Shared benchmarks2 rowsMMLU PRO leader

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Mistral Medium 3.5 when...
  • Mistral Medium 3.5 uniquely exposes Reasoning in local model data.
  • Local decision data tags Mistral Medium 3.5 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Choose Qwen3.5-9B when...
  • Qwen3.5-9B leads the largest shared benchmark signal on MMLU PRO by 2.7 points.
  • Qwen3.5-9B has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
  • Qwen3.5-9B has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $0.15/1M tokens.
  • Local decision data tags Qwen3.5-9B for RAG, Agents, and Long context.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.

Lower estimate Qwen3.5-9B

Mistral Medium 3.5

$3,075

Cheapest tracked route/tier: Mistral AI Studio

Qwen3.5-9B

$118

Cheapest tracked route/tier: Together AI

Estimated monthly gap: $2,958. Batch, cache, alternate speed tiers, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.

Switch friction

Mistral Medium 3.5 -> Qwen3.5-9B
  • Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Qwen3.5-9B is $7.35/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
  • Check replacement coverage for Reasoning before moving production traffic.
Qwen3.5-9B -> Mistral Medium 3.5
  • Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Mistral Medium 3.5 is $7.35/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
  • Mistral Medium 3.5 adds Reasoning in local capability data.

Specs

Specification
Released2026-04-292026-03-02
Context window256K262K
Parameters128B9B
Architecturedecoder onlydecoder only
LicenseMistral LicenseApache 2.0
Knowledge cutoff--

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3.5-9B
Input price$1.50/1M tokens$0.10/1M tokens
Output price$7.50/1M tokens$0.15/1M tokens
Providers

Capabilities

CapabilityMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3.5-9B
VisionYesYes
MultimodalYesYes
ReasoningYesNo
Function callingYesYes
Tool useYesYes
Structured outputsYesYes
Code executionNoNo
IDE integrationNoNo
Computer useNoNo
Parallel agentsNoNo

Benchmarks

BenchmarkMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3.5-9B
MMLU PRO79.882.5
Google-Proof Q&A71.381.7

Deep dive

On shared benchmark coverage, MMLU PRO has Mistral Medium 3.5 at 79.8 and Qwen3.5-9B at 82.5, with Qwen3.5-9B ahead by 2.7 points; Google-Proof Q&A has Mistral Medium 3.5 at 71.3 and Qwen3.5-9B at 81.7, with Qwen3.5-9B ahead by 10.4 points. The largest visible gap is 10.4 points on Google-Proof Q&A, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.

The capability footprint differs most on reasoning mode: Mistral Medium 3.5. Both models share vision, multimodal input, function calling, and tool use, 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.

For cost, Mistral Medium 3.5 lists $1.50/1M input and $7.50/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider, while Qwen3.5-9B lists $0.10/1M input and $0.15/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Qwen3.5-9B lower by about $3.18 per million blended tokens. Availability is 3 providers versus 3, so concentration risk also matters.

Choose Mistral Medium 3.5 when reasoning depth are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3.5-9B when long-context analysis, larger context windows, and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.

FAQ

Which has a larger context window, Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B supports 262K tokens, while Mistral Medium 3.5 supports 256K tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.

Which is cheaper, Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Mistral Medium 3.5 costs $1.50/1M input and $7.50/1M output tokens. Qwen3.5-9B costs $0.10/1M input and $0.15/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.

Is Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen3.5-9B open source?

Mistral Medium 3.5 is listed under Mistral License. Qwen3.5-9B 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 vision, Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen3.5-9B?

Both Mistral Medium 3.5 and Qwen3.5-9B expose vision. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.

Which is better for multimodal input, Mistral Medium 3.5 or Qwen3.5-9B?

Both Mistral Medium 3.5 and Qwen3.5-9B expose multimodal input. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.

Where can I run Mistral Medium 3.5 and Qwen3.5-9B?

Mistral Medium 3.5 is available on Mistral AI Studio, OpenRouter, and Vercel AI Gateway. Qwen3.5-9B is available on Together AI, OpenRouter, and Alibaba Cloud PAI-EAS. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-05-22. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.