Gemini 4 Argon vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct (Venice)

On the 13 use cases both models ran, Gemini 4 Argon won 12 to 1 (better outcome first, then lower cost).

Pass rate: Gemini 4 Argon 100% (13 runs) vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct (Venice) 8% (13 runs). Average cost per run: $0.21 vs $0.0050.

Metric	Gemini 4 Argon	Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct (Venice)
Runs on shared use cases	13	13
Pass rate	100% (13/13)	8% (1/13)
Avg cost per run	$0.21	$0.0050
Avg wall time	3m	2m
Step-ins per run	0.00	0.00
Use cases won	12	1

Use case by use case

AIS collision risk: closest point of approach and alert levels: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Anchor drag alarm from a GPS track: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Backtest a moving-average crossover on a bundled synthetic price file: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Best fishing windows from tide, solunar and weather data: Gemini 4 Argon 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 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Catch log checked against a made-up fishing regulations table: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Go/no-go departure time from a gridded wind file: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Model a game-ready low-poly 3D prop from a one-line brief, within a tight triangle budget: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Sailboat instrument dashboard from an NMEA 0183 log: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Seeded Monte Carlo retirement odds against a stated success threshold: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Tide height by rule of twelfths and cosine, with under-keel clearance windows: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)
Water-quality sensor anomaly flags and daily means: Gemini 4 Argon better (pass 100% vs 0%)

Only use cases both models ran are compared; all settings of each model are grouped. How we score.