GLM 5.1 vs Mistral Medium 3.5

Choose GLM 5.1 if you want…

• ✓Higher intelligence (Artificial Analysis index 40)
• ✓Lower price ($2.15 / 1M blended)

Choose Mistral Medium 3.5 if you want…

• ✓Faster output (~132.8 tokens/sec)
• ✓Larger context window (256K)

GLM 5.1

GLM-5.1 from Z.ai is built for one thing above all else: software engineering that runs on its own. A 754-billion parameter Mixture-of-Experts model, it tops the SWE-Bench Pro leaderboard at 58.4%, edging out both GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 4.6 on real-world coding tasks. What sets it apart in practice is stamina — it can pursue a single engineering goal autonomously for up to eight hours, sustaining hundreds of iterations and thousands of tool calls without human intervention. Users consistently praise this long-horizon execution for agent-based workflows where other models stall. It also delivers fast responses, with a time-to-first-token of 1.33 seconds against a class median of 2.37 seconds. The honest trade-off: GLM-5.1 accepts text only, with no image input, making it a poor fit for visual debugging or UI-centric tasks. It also tends toward verbosity in practice, which can inflate token costs. For teams building autonomous coding pipelines, though, it earns its place at the top of the leaderboard.

Mistral Medium 3.5

Mistral Medium 3.5 is Mistral's multimodal flagship on just4o.chat, served through the Vercel AI Gateway as mistral/mistral-medium-3.5. It combines frontier text reasoning with native image understanding in a single model, so you can hand it a screenshot, chart, or document image alongside your prompt and get a grounded answer back. A 256k-token context window handles long inputs comfortably, and function calling makes it suitable for agentic and tool-driven work. It is a Premium model on just4o.chat, billed at 3 premium requests per send before length multipliers, reflecting its higher provider output price of $7.50 per million tokens ($1.50 per million input). The honest trade-offs: no native web search, and as a vision-capable generalist rather than a dedicated reasoning model, it does not expose a step-by-step thinking budget the way Magistral does. For multimodal analysis, visual document work, and high-quality general assistance where image input matters, it is the model to reach for.