Mistral Medium 3 vs Sarvam 30B
Mistral Medium 3 (2025) and Sarvam 30B (2026) are compact production models from MistralAI and Sarvam.ai. Mistral Medium 3 ships a 128k-token context window, while Sarvam 30B ships a 66k-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
Sarvam 30B is safer overall; choose Mistral Medium 3 when coding workflow support matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Mistral Medium 3 | Sarvam 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | multimodal apps and tool-calling agents | tool-calling agents |
| Decision fit | Coding, RAG, and Agents | Agents and JSON / Tool use |
| Context window | 128k | 66k |
| Cheapest output | - | - |
| Provider routes | 0 tracked | 0 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 rows | 0 rows |
Decision tradeoffs
- Mistral Medium 3 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Mistral Medium 3 uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Mistral Medium 3 for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
- Local decision data tags Sarvam 30B for Agents and JSON / Tool use.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Mistral Medium 3
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Sarvam 30B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Mistral Medium 3 and Sarvam 30B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs before moving production traffic.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Sarvam 30B and Mistral Medium 3; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- Mistral Medium 3 adds Vision, Multimodal, and Structured outputs in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2025-05-01 | 2026-03-22 |
| Context window | 128k | 66k |
| Parameters | — | 30B (2.4B active) |
| Architecture | decoder only | moe |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0(OSI) |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Commercial use | Commercial use with conditions | Commercial use allowed |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2025-03 | 2025-06 |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Mistral Medium 3 | Sarvam 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | - |
| Output price | - | - |
| Providers | - | - |
Pricing not yet sourced for either model.
Capabilities
| Capability | Mistral Medium 3 | Sarvam 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | Yes | No |
| Multimodal | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Function calling | Yes | Yes |
| Tool use | Yes | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | No |
| Code execution | Yes | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Mistral Medium 3, multimodal input: Mistral Medium 3, structured outputs: Mistral Medium 3, and code execution: Mistral Medium 3. Both models share 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.
Pricing coverage is uneven: Mistral Medium 3 has no token price sourced yet and Sarvam 30B has no token price sourced yet. Provider availability is 0 tracked routes versus 0. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.
Choose Mistral Medium 3 when coding workflow support and larger context windows are central to the workload. Choose Sarvam 30B when provider fit 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.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Mistral Medium 3 or Sarvam 30B?
Mistral Medium 3 supports 128k tokens, while Sarvam 30B supports 66k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.
Is Mistral Medium 3 or Sarvam 30B open source?
Mistral Medium 3 is listed under Proprietary. Sarvam 30B 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 or Sarvam 30B?
Mistral Medium 3 has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for multimodal input, Mistral Medium 3 or Sarvam 30B?
Mistral Medium 3 has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for function calling, Mistral Medium 3 or Sarvam 30B?
Both Mistral Medium 3 and Sarvam 30B expose function calling. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.
When should I pick Mistral Medium 3 over Sarvam 30B?
Sarvam 30B is safer overall; choose Mistral Medium 3 when coding workflow support matters. If your workload also depends on coding workflow support, start with Mistral Medium 3; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with Sarvam 30B.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-19. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.