Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Mistral Large 4
Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Mistral Large 4 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.
Compare Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Mistral Large 4 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Mistral Large 4 on Vision Evals
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 76.4% to 38.9%.
Overall, Claude Sonnet 5.5 averages 83.8% (#8 of 61) against 68.5% (#36 of 61) for Mistral Large 4.
Mistral Large 4 is both cheaper ($0.0018 vs $0.0065 per sample) and faster (8.8s vs 10.8s per sample).
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Mistral Large 4 Comparison Table
Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 8, 2026
| Property | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | Mistral |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Sep 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | 1.05T total, 49B active |
| License | Proprietary | Custom |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $0.680 |
| Output $/1M | $10.00 | $2.09 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Phrase Grounding | Not listed | Supported |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 83.8% | 68.5% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0065 | $0.0018 |
| Avg speed / sample | 10.78s | 8.78s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 74.3% ±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 75.3 | 59.3% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.5 to 60.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | 76.8% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.3 | 50.2% ±2.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.0 to 53.0 |
| Counting (low) | 79.3% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7 | 54.5% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 55.4 |
| Counting (high) | 82.9% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 83.8 | 63.1% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 64.9 |
| Identification (low) | 91.7% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8 | 85.4% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5 |
| Identification (high) | 90.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6 | 85.4% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5 |
| OCR (low) | 90.6% ±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.0 to 91.7 | 92.7% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.8 to 93.3 |
| OCR (high) | 90.9% ±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.2 to 92.3 | 87.1% ±4.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.6 to 90.4 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 90.7% ±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 89.7 to 92.8 | 80.1% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 81.4 |
| Data Extraction (high) | 93.1% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.8 to 93.8 | 82.5% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5 |
| Reasoning (low) | 76.4% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.8 | 38.9% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 38.4 to 39.1 |
| Reasoning (high) | 83.9% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 85.4 | 57.6% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 59.6 |
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Mistral Large 4: Overview
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is a proprietary multimodal language model from Anthropic and the second release in the Claude 5.5 family, following Claude Opus 5.5. It accepts interleaved text and image input and returns text, operating with a 1M token context window and a maximum output of 128K tokens per request. The model uses adaptive thinking by default, allocating variable reasoning effort per request rather than exposing a manual extended thinking toggle, and its training data cutoff is June 2026. Anthropic positions it as a faster, lower cost complement to Opus 5.5 for well scoped everyday tasks, bug fixing, and producing documents, slides, and spreadsheets.
On visual and agentic evaluations reported at launch, Sonnet 5.5 scores 61.6% on Chartography, a chart recognition test, compared with 15.6% for Claude Sonnet 5, and 80.1% on OSWorld 2.1, a computer use benchmark measuring screenshot driven control of a desktop environment, compared with 57.0% for Sonnet 5. It reports 70.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 for agentic coding. Anthropic describes it as the first Sonnet model able to complete Pokemon Red from screenshots alone, and it generates output more than 30% faster than Sonnet 5 while using fewer tokens for equivalent work.
Mistral Large 4, nicknamed Le Chonk, is a natively multimodal mixture-of-experts model from Mistral that accepts interleaved text and image input and produces text output. It uses a granular MoE design with roughly 1.05 trillion total parameters and 49 billion active per token, reported as 52 billion when embeddings and output layers are counted, paired with a 1.6 billion parameter vision encoder and a context window of one million tokens. The model is trained from scratch on about 3,800 NVIDIA Grace Blackwell GPUs in Mistral's European data centers and supports more than 160 languages. It behaves as a hybrid instruct and reasoning system, with a reasoning effort setting that selects between direct answers and longer deliberation, alongside function calling and structured output for agentic workflows.
Image understanding is a focus of this generation, covering documents, charts, technical drawings and natural scenes, and the model emits bounding box coordinates for visual grounding queries. Reported grounding results include 42 percent on Dense200 and 73 percent on the DIOR-RSVG remote sensing benchmark. Mistral describes agentic vision workflows in which the model zooms into gigapixel satellite imagery or engineering drawings to verify details, and reports coding results such as 62 percent on DeepSWE. Figures published at preview time are preliminary because the reinforcement learning phase is still in progress.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Claude Sonnet 5.5 performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 83.8% (#8 of 61) against 68.5% (#36 of 61) for Mistral Large 4. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
Yes. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads with 76.4% against 38.9%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Mistral Large 4 is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0018 per sample against $0.0065. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output; Mistral Large 4 is priced at $0.68 per 1M input tokens and $2.09 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Mistral Large 4 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.8s per inference against 10.8s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for image captioning and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.