API cost decision in 10 seconds

GLM 5.1 vs Mistral Medium 3.1

Pick Mistral Medium 3.1 for lower cost; pick GLM 5.1 only if the larger context window matters more.

Page updated:  Data confirmed:  Prices normalized to USD per 1M tokens Sample workload: 1M input + 500K output

Budget verdict

Pick Mistral Medium 3.1 for lower cost; pick GLM 5.1 only if the larger context window matters more.

On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mistral Medium 3.1 is estimated at $1.4 vs $2.52 for GLM 5.1, saving $1.12 (44.4% lower).

Cost-first pickMistral Medium 3.1
Context-first pickGLM 5.1
Sample savings$1.1244.4%
10x traffic gap$11.2

GLM 5.1 has more context, but Mistral Medium 3.1 saves $1.12 on the standard workload. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $11.2. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.

Cost sensitivity

Workload Sensitivity

Same prices, different token mixes.

Mistral Medium 3.1 stays cheaper across input-heavy, balanced, and output-heavy sample workloads.

Workload shapeToken mixBetter pickGLM 5.1Mistral Medium 3.1
Input-heavy / RAG5M input + 500K outputMistral Medium 3.1$6.44$3
Balanced workload1M input + 1M outputMistral Medium 3.1$4.06$2.4
Output-heavy chatbot1M input + 5M outputMistral Medium 3.1$16.38$10.4
Cheaper input Mistral Medium 3.1 $0.98 vs $0.4 / 1M

Mistral Medium 3.1 is $0.58 cheaper per 1M input tokens (59.2% lower; 2.45x difference).

Cheaper output Mistral Medium 3.1 $3.08 vs $2 / 1M

Mistral Medium 3.1 is $1.08 cheaper per 1M output tokens (35.1% lower; 1.54x difference).

Larger context GLM 5.1 202.75K vs 131.07K

GLM 5.1 has 71.68K more context (1.55x larger).

Sample workload Mistral Medium 3.1 $2.52 vs $1.4

Mistral Medium 3.1 is $1.12 cheaper on the standard workload (44.4% lower).

Estimate your workload cost

Your Workload Cost

Prices are normalized to USD per 1M tokens.
GLM 5.1 Calculating… Estimated API cost
Mistral Medium 3.1 Calculating… Estimated API cost
Cheaper for this workload Calculating… Difference: calculating…

This estimate uses normalized public API pricing per 1M tokens. It is a planning aid, not a billing quote. Verify provider pricing, limits, and terms before production use.

Quick Decision

Verdict

Mistral Medium 3.1 has the lower input price; Mistral Medium 3.1 has the lower output price; GLM 5.1 offers the larger context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, Mistral Medium 3.1 is cheaper for the standard workload.

For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $2.52 for GLM 5.1 and $1.4 for Mistral Medium 3.1.

Best Fit

Choose GLM 5.1 when you care most about larger context window.

Choose Mistral Medium 3.1 when you care most about lower input-token price, and lower output-token price.

Decision Notes
  • On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mistral Medium 3.1 is estimated at $1.4 vs $2.52 for GLM 5.1, saving $1.12 (44.4% lower).
  • Mistral Medium 3.1 is $1.12 cheaper on the standard workload (44.4% lower).
  • Mistral Medium 3.1 is $0.58 cheaper per 1M input tokens (59.2% lower; 2.45x difference).
  • Mistral Medium 3.1 is $1.08 cheaper per 1M output tokens (35.1% lower; 1.54x difference).
  • GLM 5.1 has 71.68K more context (1.55x larger).
Head-to-Head Specs
FeatureGLM 5.1
(Z.ai)		Mistral Medium 3.1
(Mistral)
Input Price
prompt tokens per 1M		$0.98$0.4
Completion Price
per 1M tokens		$3.08$2
Sample Workload Cost
1M input + 500K output		$2.52$1.4
Context Window202.75K131.07K
Release Date
Popularity#23#147

Use-Case Decision Matrix

Use caseBetter pickWhy
Budget-constrained productionMistral Medium 3.1On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mistral Medium 3.1 is estimated at $1.4 vs $2.52 for GLM 5.1, saving $1.12 (44.4% lower).
High-volume input processingMistral Medium 3.1Lower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill.
Long responses and chatbotsMistral Medium 3.1Lower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens.
RAG or long-document workGLM 5.1A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files.

Related Alternatives

Same-provider lower-cost swaps
  • GLM 4.5 Air (free) can replace GLM 5.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
  • GLM 4 32B can replace GLM 5.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.15.
  • GLM 4.7 Flash can replace GLM 5.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.26.
  • GLM 4.5 Air can replace GLM 5.1 when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.54.
Larger context near this budget
  • Llama 4 Scout offers 10M context with $0.23 sample workload cost.
  • Grok 4.20 offers 2M context with $2.5 sample workload cost.
  • Owl Alpha offers 1.05M context with $0 sample workload cost.
  • DeepSeek V4 Flash offers 1.05M context with $0.2 sample workload cost.

Cheaper alternatives

Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.

Open cheapest models

Larger context alternatives

Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.

Open largest context models

Provider catalogs

Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.

Open provider hubs

Z.ai catalog

Review all tracked Z.ai models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.

Open Z.ai models

Mistral catalog

Check other Mistral models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.

Open Mistral models
GLM 5.1

GLM-5.1 delivers a major leap in coding capability, with particularly significant gains in handling long-horizon tasks. Unlike previous models built around minute-level interactions, GLM-5.1 can work independently and continuously on...

Mistral Medium 3.1

Mistral Medium 3.1 is an updated version of Mistral Medium 3, which is a high-performance enterprise-grade language model designed to deliver frontier-level capabilities at significantly reduced operational cost. It balances...