Directory · Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Terra vs Mistral Medium 3.5
Side-by-side API economics and benchmarks. Per-1M input and output rates, context window, and verified metrics.
Tale of the tape
Head-to-head specs pulled from each model profile.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Terra | Mistral Medium 3.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Input cost / 1M | $2.50 | $1.50 |
| Output cost / 1M | $15.00 | $7.50 |
| Context window | 1,050,000 tokens | 256,000 tokens |
| MMLU score | — | — |
Cost verdict
Enter monthly input and output volumes to see total cost savings.
GPT-5.6 Terra
- Input: 1M × $2.50 = $2.50
- Output: 1M × $15.00 = $15.00
- Total
- $17.50
Mistral Medium 3.5
- Input: 1M × $1.50 = $1.50
- Output: 1M × $7.50 = $7.50
- Total
- $9.00
Total cost savings
$8.50
Mistral Medium 3.5 saves $8.50 per month vs the other model at this volume.
Model routing savings
Uses this page's verified rates. GPT-5.6 Terra is the premium route (higher combined per-1M cost); Mistral Medium 3.5 handles routine traffic.
All premium
GPT-5.6 Terra
$875.00
100% of input and output on the premium route
Routed stack
80% → Mistral Medium 3.5
20% → GPT-5.6 Terra
$535.00
- Routine slice
- $360.00
- Premium slice
- $175.00
Monthly savings
$340.00
38.9% lower
Rates pulled from this page's model database entries (gpt-5-6-terra, mistral-medium-3-5) — same per-1M input/output figures as Tale of the tape. Production routing needs quality gates and monitoring.
Related comparisons
More head-to-head model matchups.