Side-by-side technical and economic comparison between Mistral AI's Mistral Small 4 and Meta / Together's Llama 4 Vivas.
| Metric | Mistral Small 4 | Llama 4 Vivas | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provider Organization | Mistral AI | Meta / Together | — |
| Standard Input / 1M | $0.15 | $0.25 | Mistral Small 4 (40% lower) |
| Cached Input / 1M | $0.015 | $0.06 | Mistral Small 4 lower |
| Output / 1M | $0.60 | $0.85 | Mistral Small 4 lower |
| Context Window | 256k | 1M | Llama 4 Vivas (1M) |
| Max Generation Tokens | 8.2k | 128k | Llama 4 Vivas |
| Tokenizer Family | Mistral Tekken Tokenizer (131k vocabulary) | Meta Llama 3 Tokenizer (128k vocabulary) | — |
Opt for Mistral Small 4 when your engineering requirements prioritize Mistral AI's ecosystem, specific tokenizer efficiencies (Calibrated Mistral Tokenizer (±3%)), or when your expected prompt-to-completion ratios favor its $0.15/M input rate.
Opt for Llama 4 Vivas when looking for Meta / Together's tooling integration, specific context window depth (1M tokens), or when output generation volume favors its $0.85/M rate.