Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct (Venice)
On the 10 use cases both models ran, Gemini 3.8 Flash won 9 to 1 (better outcome first, then lower cost).
Pass rate: Gemini 3.8 Flash 100% (10 runs) vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct (Venice) 10% (10 runs). Average cost per run: $0.39 vs $0.0052.
| Metric | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct (Venice) |
|---|---|---|
| Runs on shared use cases | 10 | 10 |
| Pass rate | 100% (10/10) | 10% (1/10) |
| Avg cost per run | $0.39 | $0.0052 |
| Avg wall time | 4m | 2m |
| Step-ins per run | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Use cases won | 9 | 1 |
Use case by use case
- AIS collision risk: closest point of approach and alert levels: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Anchor drag alarm from a GPS track: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Best fishing windows from tide, solunar and weather data: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Best sailing angle and leg times from a polar table: Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct (Venice) better (pass 100% vs 100%)
- Boat fuel range with a reserve over a planned trip: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Catch log checked against a made-up fishing regulations table: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Go/no-go departure time from a gridded wind file: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Sailboat instrument dashboard from an NMEA 0183 log: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Tide height by rule of twelfths and cosine, with under-keel clearance windows: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
- Water-quality sensor anomaly flags and daily means: Gemini 3.8 Flash better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Only use cases both models ran are compared; all settings of each model are grouped. How we score.