Codestral vs Grok 4 Fast >128k
Side-by-side comparison of pricing and capabilities
Input Price Comparison
| Attribute | Codestral | Grok 4 Fast >128k |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | xAI |
| Input Price | $0.3 /1M tokens | $0.4 /1M tokens |
| Output Price | $0.9 /1M tokens | $1 /1M tokens |
| Cached Input | $0.030 /1M tokens | $0.050 /1M tokens |
| Context Window | 256K | 1.0M |
| Type | chat | chat |
| Status | current | current |
Capability Comparison
| Capability | Codestral | Grok 4 Fast >128k |
|---|---|---|
| coding |
Which should you choose?
Budget-conscious: Codestral is 25% cheaper on input tokens ($0.3 vs $0.4 per 1M tokens).
Context-heavy tasks: Grok 4 Fast >128k offers a larger context window (1.0M vs 256K), making it better for long documents or conversations.
Capability fit: Codestral supports 1 capabilities (coding), while Grok 4 Fast >128k supports 1 (coding).
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper: Codestral or Grok 4 Fast >128k?
Codestral costs $0.3/1M input vs Grok 4 Fast >128k at $0.4/1M input. Codestral is 25% cheaper on input tokens.
How do output prices compare between Codestral and Grok 4 Fast >128k?
Codestral output: $0.9/1M, Grok 4 Fast >128k output: $1/1M. Codestral is more economical for generation-heavy workloads.
What is Codestral best used for?
Codestral is best for budget-conscious applications, high-volume chatbots, and tasks where cost efficiency is the primary concern.
What is Grok 4 Fast >128k best used for?
Grok 4 Fast >128k is suited for complex reasoning, analysis, and tasks that benefit from its coding capabilities.