Roboflow

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Mistral Large 4

Compare Gemini 3.8 Flash and Mistral Large 4 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, and Open Prompt.

Compare Gemini 3.8 Flash 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.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GoogleGemini 3.8 Flash
Run to compare this model.
MistralMistral Large 4
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Mistral Large 4 on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.8 Flash scores higher on 5 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Gemini 3.8 Flash leads 81.2% to 38.9%.

Overall, Gemini 3.8 Flash averages 85.1% (#6 of 61) against 68.5% (#36 of 61) for Mistral Large 4.

Mistral Large 4 is both cheaper ($0.0018 vs $0.0033 per sample) and faster (8.8s vs 11.6s per sample).

Gemini 3.8 FlashMistral Large 4

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Mistral Large 4 Comparison Table

Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 8, 2026

PropertyGemini 3.8 FlashMistral Large 4
OrganizationGoogleMistral
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Oct 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknown1.05T total, 49B active
LicenseProprietaryCustom
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.750$0.680
Output $/1M$3.75$2.09
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Phrase GroundingNot listedSupported
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
85.1%
68.5%
Avg cost / sample$0.0033$0.0018
Avg speed / sample11.65s8.78s
By task
Object Detection (low)
68.1%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.3 to 69.0
$0.0041
59.3%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.5 to 60.0
$0.0028
Object Detection (high)
74.8%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.4 to 75.6
$0.021
50.2%
±2.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.0 to 53.0
$0.023
Counting (low)
78.8%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 81.1
$0.0036
54.5%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 55.4
$0.0010
Counting (high)
79.3%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.024
63.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 64.9
$0.0094
Identification (low)
97.9%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0014
85.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0009
Identification (high)
96.9%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 96.9
$0.0034
85.4%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.0044
OCR (low)
87.3%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.5 to 88.2
$0.0024
92.7%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.8 to 93.3
$0.0016
OCR (high)
88.8%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.0 to 89.4
$0.064
87.1%
±4.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.6 to 90.4
$0.025
Data Extraction (low)
97.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 97.9
$0.0018
80.1%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 81.4
$0.0010
Data Extraction (high)
94.8%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 95.9
$0.0089
82.5%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5
$0.0033
Reasoning (low)
81.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.8 to 81.5
$0.0034
38.9%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 38.4 to 39.1
$0.0013
Reasoning (high)
84.5%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 83.4 to 85.4
$0.021
57.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.6 to 59.6
$0.013

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Mistral Large 4: Overview

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Gemini 3.8 Flash is a natively multimodal reasoning model in Google's Gemini 3 series, positioned as the speed and cost oriented Flash tier while targeting long-horizon software engineering, autonomous agents, and enterprise workflows. It accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents in a single request and returns text, with an input limit of 1,048,576 tokens and an output limit of 65,536 tokens. Thinking is configurable at low, medium, and high levels, and the model supports function calling, code execution, structured outputs, context caching, search and Maps grounding, file search, and computer use in preview. Image generation, audio generation, and the Live API are not supported.

On vision oriented evaluations the model reports 86.2% on CharXiv Reasoning for chart and figure synthesis and 87.8% on LVBench for long video understanding in agentic mode, alongside 90.8% on Terminal-Bench 2.1 and 61.6% on SWE-Bench Pro for coding. Following Gemini API conventions, it can localize objects by emitting bounding boxes as [ymin, xmin, ymax, xmax] integers normalized to a 0 to 1000 range, which supports prompt driven detection and grounding in addition to captioning, document parsing, and visual question answering. The knowledge cutoff is March 2026, though coverage in some domains reflects the January 2025 cutoff shared across the Gemini 3 family.

Mistral Large 4

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, Gemini 3.8 Flash performed better. It scores higher on 5 of the six vision tasks and averages 85.1% (#6 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, Gemini 3.8 Flash leads with 81.2% 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 $0.0033. Gemini 3.8 Flash is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $3.75 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 11.6s. 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 object detection and image captioning in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.