token.app › Compare › Codestral 2508 (batch) vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Codestral 2508 (batch) vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Qwen3.7 Flash is 4.1× cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 basis. Qwen3.7 Flash accepts the larger context window (1M).

Head to head
Blended price uses a 3:1 input:output mix
Codestral 2508 (batch)Qwen3.7 Flash
ProviderMistral AIAlibaba
Input $/1M$0.150$0.030
Output $/1M$0.450$0.130
Blended $/1M$0.225$0.055
Context window256K1M
Max output205K66K
ReleasedAug 2025Jul 2026
LicenceProprietaryProprietary
Choose Codestral 2508 (batch) if…
  • No clear advantage on the data we hold.
Choose Qwen3.7 Flash if…
  • Costs less per token — $0.055 vs $0.225 blended
  • Larger context window (1M)
  • Newer model (released Jul 2026)
FAQ
Which is better, Codestral 2508 (batch) or Qwen3.7 Flash?
We do not hold independently-run benchmark scores covering both Codestral 2508 (batch) and Qwen3.7 Flash, so we make no quality claim. Their pricing and specifications are compared on this page.
Is Codestral 2508 (batch) cheaper than Qwen3.7 Flash?
Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper: $0.055 versus $0.225 per million tokens blended at 3:1 input:output. Input alone: $0.150 vs $0.030. Output alone: $0.450 vs $0.130.
What context windows do Codestral 2508 (batch) and Qwen3.7 Flash have?
Codestral 2508 (batch): 256,000 tokens. Qwen3.7 Flash: 1,000,000 tokens.
Who makes Codestral 2508 (batch) and Qwen3.7 Flash?
Codestral 2508 (batch) is made by Mistral AI. Qwen3.7 Flash is made by Alibaba.
Related comparisons
Codestral 2508 (batch) full details Qwen3.7 Flash full details Codestral 2508 (batch) vs Flint (free) Codestral 2508 (batch) vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash (free) Codestral 2508 (batch) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 Codestral 2508 (batch) vs Glimpse Codestral 2508 (batch) vs Xing4.0 29B A4B (free) Codestral 2508 (batch) vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B