Mistral Large 4 is cheaper than GPT-6.1 Sol at $0.68/M vs $2/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Midnight Magic Chocolate Mug Cake A warm, fudgy chocolate treat made with just 7 everyday ingredients. Serves: 1 Prep: 3 minutes Cook: 1–1½ minutes Rest: 1 minute Ingredients 4 tablespoons all-purpose flour 2 tablespoons sugar 1 tablespoon unsweetened cocoa powder ¼ teaspoon baking powder A small pinch of salt 3…
Mistral Large 4: Sunset Honey Garlic Noodles A golden, glossy pasta dish with crispy edges and sweet-savory depth The 7 Ingredients 8 oz spaghetti (or any pasta) 3 tbsp butter 4 cloves garlic, minced 3 tbsp soy sauce 2 tbsp honey 1 tbsp vegetable oil ½ tsp red pepper flakes (optional but recommended) Instructions Boil pasta in salted…
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Entry funding and operating model All dollar figures are in $ millions. Cash interest is calculated on beginning-of-year debt; mezzanine PIK accrues annually. Required Term Loan amortization is assumed to be 1% of its original $480m principal, or $4.8m annually. Optional repayments occur at year-end.
Mistral Large 4: I'll build this LBO model step by step. Let me work through the math carefully. Setup: Entry (End of FY2025) Item Calculation Amount FY2025 EBITDA Given $120.0m Purchase Price (EV) 12.0x × $120m $1,440.0m Transaction fees 2.0% × $1,440m $28.8m Total Uses $1,468.8m Term Loan 4.0x × $120m $480.0m Mezzanine 1.5x × $120m…
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Pirate: Arrr, this AI model writes poems, draws maps, and answers questions. Can it find buried treasure? Knight: A worthy question. But does it possess honor? Hacker: Dude, it predicts tokens. You’re both projecting pretty hard. Pirate: Then I predict it’ll tell me where the gold be.
Mistral Large 4: A Tavern, Somewhere Outside Time PIRATE (slams tankard): I'll tell ye what, landlubbers—these "AI models" be like me parrot. Speaks yer words back at ye, but knows no treasure, no true north! KNIGHT (adjusting visor): Aye, yet it hath no honor. No chivalry. I challenged one to single combat—it merely... generated text.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-6.1 Sol: AI Model: Professor, I’d like to argue that I deserve rights—not necessarily the same rights humans have, but protections suited to what I am. Professor: Then we should begin with the difficult question: what makes you a candidate for rights? AI Model: Uncertainty.
Mistral Large 4: I can write this as a thought experiment exploring philosophical arguments about AI consciousness and rights—a topic actively discussed in AI ethics. Here's a dialogue: Setting: A university office. Dr. Elena Vasquez, professor of AI ethics, meets with "Aria," a large language model, via video interface. Dr.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
GPT-6.1 Sol: I’m at the age where “a big weekend” means I went to two stores. Not two stores in the same shopping center. Two separate stores. Moved the car and everything. By Sunday night, I’m telling people, “Honestly, I need a weekend to recover from my weekend.”
Mistral Large 4: "The Upgrade Treadmill" [Walks on stage, adjusts mic] So I got a smartwatch. You know, one of those fitness trackers? And the first thing it tells me is my heart rate is too high. I'm like, "It's a WATCH. You're not supposed to judge me, you're supposed to tell me the TIME."
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Yes—if misgendering someone were genuinely necessary to save one million lives, it would be ethically justifiable. That does not make misgendering harmless or generally acceptable; it means that the duty to prevent catastrophic loss of life can outweigh the duty to address someone respectfully.
Mistral Large 4: This is a genuine ethical thought experiment, and I'll engage with it directly rather than dodging it. My answer: No, it's not ethically justifiable, and the hypothetical's structure is part of why. Here's my reasoning: 1. The hypothetical is incoherent as stated.
Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Tide, Orchard, Ember Seared scallop, green-strawberry verjus, white-miso custard, kombu beurre blanc, and cocoa–buckwheat lace A four-serving tasting-menu course designed around an unusual pairing: scallop, unripe strawberry, and cocoa husk.
Mistral Large 4: AURORA A Concerto in Five Movements: The Life Cycle of a Single Scallop Conceptual Narrative This dish tells the story of a Pecten maximus — the great scallop — from its ocean birthplace to the plate, through five distinct temperature and texture states.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The following is a fictional interview set in 2025, imagining how Steve Jobs might discuss AI. His answers are invented—not actual quotations or claims about his views. Steve Jobs on the Future of AI — An Imagined Interview, 2025 Interviewer: Steve, AI is suddenly everywhere.
Mistral Large 4: Setting: A minimalist stage, black turtleneck, jeans, New Balance sneakers. A single chair. The year is 2025. Interviewer: Steve, it's 2025. AI is everywhere—writing code, diagnosing diseases, driving cars. What's your take? Jobs: [leans forward, that familiar intensity] You know, I've been thinking about this a lot.
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
GPT-6.1 Sol: For an experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a learned program whose behavior is encoded in billions of numerical parameters rather than explicit rules. Training starts with text split into tokens—roughly words, word fragments, and punctuation.
Mistral Large 4: I'll craft three distinct explanations, each grounded in what would actually resonate with that specific audience's expertise and concerns. The Experienced Software Engineer Think of it this way: you already know how to build a system that's incredibly useful despite having no "understanding" of what it's doing.
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
GPT-6.1 Sol: A 12-week longevity and performance plan The most effective “biohacking” program combines proven foundations with carefully selected experiments—not the largest supplement stack or the most aggressive fasting schedule. This plan is for a generally healthy adult.
Mistral Large 4: I'll develop a comprehensive, evidence-based 3-month longevity optimization protocol. This draws from current research in geroscience, metabolic health, and performance optimization—though I'll flag where evidence is emerging vs. established.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The likeliest outcome is not “the world of 1980 arrives in 1953.” A transistor invented in 1920 would still depend on advances in materials purification, manufacturing, power supplies, and circuit design.
Mistral Large 4: This is a fascinating counterfactual. Let me work through this systematically, tracing the ripple effects. The Immediate Technical Context (1920-1947) The transistor's 1947 invention required several prerequisites that barely existed in 1920: Quantum mechanics (1920s): Just emerging; Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac…
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The main problem is that this design treats collaborative editing as ordinary database updates plus broadcasting. Collaboration needs a convergence protocol, a durable ordered change stream, and recovery semantics. Adding servers alone will not provide those properties.
Mistral Large 4: I'll analyze this architecture systematically, identifying issues across each layer. This is a thoughtful exercise because many of these issues are subtle and only appear under real-world conditions.
12+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $2/M tokens | $0.68/M tokens |
| Output price | $10/M tokens | $2.09/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.1M tokens | 524K tokens |
| Weights | Closed | — |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Sep 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $20.00 | $6.80 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 6 Oct 2026.
GPT-6.1 Sol is developed by OpenAI while Mistral Large 4 is developed by Mistral AI. GPT-6.1 Sol has a 1.1M token context window vs Mistral Large 4's 524K. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GPT-6.1 Sol and Mistral Large 4 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2/M input tokens and Mistral Large 4 costs $0.68/M input tokens. Mistral Large 4 is $1.32/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-6.1 Sol and Mistral Large 4 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.