llama-4-maverick
Chat comparison
llama-4-maverickvsmistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
llama-4-maverickBetter fit
1,048,576 tokens
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
32,000 tokens
Input formats
llama-4-maverick
text, image
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
text
Vision
llama-4-maverickBetter fit
Supported
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
Not supported
Tool calling
llama-4-maverickBetter fit
Supported
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
Not supported
JSON mode
llama-4-maverick
Not supported
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501Better fit
Supported
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
llama-4-maverick
95.29%
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
100%
Average response time
llama-4-maverick
4,187.49 ms
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
4,366.12 ms
P95 API latency
llama-4-maverick
10,000 ms
mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501
30,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Quick take
- llama-4-maverick has a larger context window.
- llama-4-maverick supports image input while the other model does not.
- mistral-Small-24B-Instruct-2501 recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.
- llama-4-maverick recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.