Codestral API pricing 2508

What it costs on a real workload

Per 1M tokens processed, at the rates above. How the four profiles are defined.

Compare every model on these profiles →

Observed rate history

Dates are when we observed the rate in our own snapshots, which can lag the provider's announcement. Rates per 1M tokens.

What the record shows

We have observed one change to Codestral's rates since it entered our archive on 2025-12-15. The most recent, on 2026-08-30, left the output rate unchanged.

Against the 40 models we price, it is the 9th cheapest for retrieval-shaped work, which reads a great deal and writes little, and the 9th cheapest for content-shaped work, which does the reverse. The two are close, so it holds its position whichever way your workload leans.

It charges 3.0 times more for output than for input, against a median of 5.0 times across the set. That is narrower than most, so it punishes long answers less than the typical model does.

Inside Mistral's own lineup it is the 6th cheapest of the 10 models we track on this workload, so 5 cheaper and 4 more expensive options sit on the same account behind the same key.

33 of the 40 models we price offer a larger context window, and 5 match it exactly. Context is a capability limit rather than a cost one: paying more buys no extra room unless the larger window is what you are paying for.

Cached input reads at $0.030 against a standard input rate of $0.300, a 90% discount on the part of your prompt that repeats.

Whether it accepts image input is not stated in the source we capture, and we do not guess at it.

Its 128k token context window holds roughly 96,000 words of English text in a single request. A workload that does not fit cannot run here at any price, which is a capability limit rather than a cost one.

Priced near this one

Closest to Codestral on a retrieval workload, cheaper and more expensive alike. Cost only; we publish no quality score.

Retrieval profile: 800k in, 200k out, 70% cached where offered.