GPT-5.4 vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B
Compare GPT-5.4 and Mistral Small 3.1 24B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in OCR, Image Captioning, and Open Prompt.
Compare GPT-5.4 vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GPT-5.4 vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B: Overview
GPT-5.4 is a proprietary multimodal large language model developed by OpenAI and released on March 5, 2026. It is designed for professional workloads such as advanced software development, research, and agentic automation. The model combines the general reasoning capabilities of the GPT-5 series with software engineering improvements derived from GPT-5.3-Codex. In the API and Codex environments it supports context windows of up to 1 million tokens, enabling long-context reasoning and large-scale code or document workflows.
Compared with GPT-5.2, GPT-5.4 reduces false individual claims by 33% and lowers overall response errors by 18%, improving factual reliability across complex tasks. It is also the first general-purpose OpenAI release with native computer-use capabilities, allowing agents to interact with desktops, browsers, and external applications to complete multi-step workflows. The model family includes three variants: GPT-5.4 (standard), GPT-5.4 Pro for higher-performance workloads, and GPT-5.4 Thinking, a reasoning-oriented version in ChatGPT that presents an upfront plan before generating its response. The API also introduces a Tool Search system that allows models to retrieve tool definitions dynamically, reducing token usage in tool-heavy integrations.
Mistral Small 3.1 24B, released on March 17, 2025, is an open-weight multimodal model from Mistral AI, distributed under the Apache-2.0 license. With around 24B parameters and a 128K token context window, it is available in both base and instruction-tuned (“Instruct”) variants. The model introduces vision support alongside text, enabling tasks like multimodal reasoning, captioning, and image-based Q&A.
It is multilingual, supporting many languages, and is optimized for fast responses, function calling, structured dialogue, and long-context reasoning. Despite its size, the model can be run locally in quantized formats, fitting on machines with ~32GB RAM, making it accessible to developers outside large cloud setups. However, the output length is smaller than the 128K input window, meaning long generations may require chaining. In addition, using full vision features or the maximum context window significantly increases compute costs, and performance on highly complex reasoning or enterprise-scale tasks still trails larger proprietary frontier models.
GPT-5.4 vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B Comparison Table
| Property | GPT-5.4 | Mistral Small 3.1 24B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Mistral |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2026 | Mar 2025 |
| Context Window | 1.1M | 128K |
| Parameters | 24B | |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.50 | $0.351 |
| Output $/1M | $15.00 | $0.555 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Classification | Demo | |
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts Score key:≥75%40–74%<40% | ||
| Overall Score | 77.61% | |
| Avg Response Time | 7.16s | |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.4K | |
| Median output tokens | 108 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0052 | |
| Defect Detection | 86.7%(13/15) | |
| Document Understanding | 88.9%(8/9) | |
| Object Counting | 40%(4/10) | |
| Object Understanding | 85.7%(12/14) | |
| Spatial Understanding | 78.9%(15/19) | |
Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology