Claude Code vs. Mistral Vibe
Comparison between Claude Code and Mistral Vibe across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, including benchmark scores, cost, execution time, and token usage.
For details relating to our methodology, see our methodology page.
Explore other comparisons
vs
Comparison
Side-by-side comparison of Claude Code and Mistral Vibe.
Coding Agent Comparison
Metric | Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Agent Harness | Claude Code | Mistral Vibe | |
Representative Model | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | Mistral Large 4 (High) | |
Coding Agent Index | 62 | 48 | Claude Code has a higher Coding Agent Index than Mistral Vibe |
FrontierCode v1.1 | 56% | 45% | Claude Code has a higher FrontierCode v1.1 score than Mistral Vibe |
Terminal-Bench 4.0 | 63% | 41% | Claude Code has a higher Terminal-Bench 4.0 score than Mistral Vibe |
SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA | 66% | 59% | Claude Code has a higher SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA score than Mistral Vibe |
Cost per Task | $11.42 | $1.26 | Mistral Vibe has a lower cost per task than Claude Code |
Time per Task | 1.0h | 48.4m | Mistral Vibe has a lower time per task than Claude Code |
Turns per Task | 146.4 | 100.1 | Mistral Vibe has a lower turns per task than Claude Code |
Token Usage per Task | 14.5M | 8.5M | Mistral Vibe has a lower token usage per task than Claude Code |
Cache Hit Rate | 95% | 91% | Claude Code has a higher cache hit rate than Mistral Vibe |
Model Variants
Evaluated model variants for Claude Code and Mistral Vibe.
Model Variants
62 | 56% | 63% | 66% | $11.42 | 1.0h | 14.5M | ||
59 | 48% | 66% | 64% | $13.30 | 1.3h | 24.1M | ||
58 | 49% | 58% | 66% | $11.53 | 35.3m | 6M | ||
43 | 40% | 30% | 59% | $1.84 | 1.0h | 22.1M | ||
39 | 45% | 17% | 56% | $3.80 | 1.3h | 9.2M | ||
37 | 47% | 31% | 34% | $2.67 | 1.2h | 16.1M | ||
48 | 45% | 41% | 59% | $1.26 | 48.4m | 8.5M | ||
35 | 35% | 26% | 45% | $0.78 | 38.8m | 5.8M |
Performance
Performance across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v2.0 incorporates 3 benchmarks: FrontierCode v1.1, Terminal-Bench 4.0, and SWE-Atlas-QnA-AA · Higher is better
Color by
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Cost per Task
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average pay-per-token API cost per task (USD)
Color by
Most attractive quadrant
Pareto line
Token Usage
Token consumption across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.
Token Usage per Task
Average input, cache, and output tokens per task
Prompt cache hit rates can vary significantly by provider routing, which can materially change effective cost.
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Total Tokens
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average total tokens per task
Color by
Most attractive quadrant
Cost
Pay-per-token API cost across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, based on current per-token pricing.
Cost per Task
Average pay-per-token API cost per task (USD) · Lower is better
Color by
Execution Time
Active agent runtime across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.
Time per Task
Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better
Color by
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Execution Time
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average agent wall time per task
Color by
Most attractive quadrant