Mistral Large 4

New

mistralai/mistral-large-4-0-20261006

Mistral Large 4 is a text and image input model that generates text. It has a context length of 524,288 tokens and supports tools and reasoning. Input pricing is $0.68 per million tokens, while output pricing is $2.09 per million tokens.

  • tool use
  • structured outputs
  • reasoning

At a glance

providermistralai
releasedOct 6, 2026
context1.0M
input / M$0.68

Specifications

What the API gives you

Context window
1.0M tokens
Max output
262K tokens
Input price
$0.68 / 1M tokens
Output price
$2.09 / 1M tokens
Cache read
$0.070 / 1M tokens
Modalities
text, image → text
Knowledge cutoff
—
Released
Oct 6, 2026

Measured evidence

Public benchmark record

Design Arena Coding
1260 Elo2026-10-16
Design Arena UI
1273 Elo2026-10-16
Design Arena Website
1259 Elo2026-10-16
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (Epoch AI)‡
58.6% ± 2.92026-10-12high effort, evaluated 2026-10-12
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI)‡
88.1% ± 1.92026-10-12high effort, evaluated 2026-10-12
LiveBench Coding
77.2%2026-10-16
LiveBench Language
49.6%2026-10-16
LiveBench Math
93.6%2026-10-16
LiveBench Reasoning
83.9%2026-10-16
LMArena Agent
-3.22026-10-14
LMArena Creative Writing
1362 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Long Query
1427 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Math
1469 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Text
1432 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Text Factuality
1433 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena WebDev
1542 Elo2026-10-13
OTIS Mock AIME (Epoch AI)‡
98.3% ± 0.62026-10-12high effort, evaluated 2026-10-12
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI)‡
20% ± 1.32026-10-09high effort, evaluated 2026-10-09

LMArena data licensed CC-BY-4.0. Aider (Apache-2.0) and SWE-bench (MIT) are open. Design Arena uses blind human preference. ‡ Submitted scaffold plus model result. Compare the harness and effort settings, not only the model name.

Task evidence

How broad is the support?

Each status is exact to this model version and the selected task. Official release claims remain provisional.

  • Best LLM for Competition MathEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 4 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Business WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 100% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Marketing CopyEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Chat & RoleplayEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Creative WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Show all 41 tasks
  • Best LLM for WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Math & ReasoningEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 5 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 100% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Frontend & UIEstablished evidence

    91% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Code CompletionEstablished evidence

    79% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 64% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Fast SummariesEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Value LLMEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    53% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Local LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    47% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for SummarizationEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Cheap LLM for High VolumeEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Cheapest Capable LLMEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Autonomous AgentsEstablished evidence

    36% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Agentic CodingEstablished evidence

    35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for AI AgentsEstablished evidence

    34% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 9 of 9 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 33% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Grounded RAGEstablished evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 38% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or LMArena Search. 6 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Hermes AgentProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OpenHandsProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for GooseProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OpenClawProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 22% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from FACTS Grounding or LMArena Document. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 21% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Route reliability or Structured-output eval. 1 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Massive ContextProvisional evidence

    20% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Document or LongBench v2. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 17% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or OSWorld Verified. 3 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • 11% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Vision or VLMEvalKit tasks. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Recommendation coverage

Where this model appears

Not currently included in a published recommendation. The task evidence panel above says exactly what is confirmed and what is still missing.

Catalog data via OpenRouter and models.dev. Last checked within the past 6 hours.