Mistral: Devstral Small 1.1 ranks higher at 24/100 vs Nous: Hermes 4 70B at 24/100. Capability-level comparison backed by match graph evidence from real search data.
| Feature | Mistral: Devstral Small 1.1 | Nous: Hermes 4 70B |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Model | Model |
| UnfragileRank | 24/100 | 24/100 |
| Adoption |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| Starting Price | $1.00e-7 per prompt token | $1.30e-7 per prompt token |
| Capabilities | 11 decomposed | 14 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Generates syntactically correct, production-ready code from natural language specifications using a 24B parameter transformer fine-tuned on software engineering tasks. The model applies attention mechanisms trained on code-documentation pairs to map intent to implementation patterns, supporting multiple programming languages through token-level code understanding rather than template matching.
Unique: Fine-tuned specifically for software engineering agents (via collaboration with All Hands AI) rather than general-purpose code generation, using domain-specific training data that emphasizes agent-compatible code patterns and tool-use scaffolding
vs alternatives: Smaller footprint (24B vs Codex 175B) with specialized training for agent workflows makes it faster and cheaper than general LLMs while maintaining code quality comparable to larger models on routine engineering tasks
Predicts and completes code sequences given partial input by leveraging transformer attention over preceding tokens and file context. The model uses causal masking to ensure predictions only depend on prior tokens, enabling real-time completion in IDE-like environments with latency under 500ms for typical completions.
Unique: Trained on software engineering codebases with explicit focus on agent-compatible completion patterns, enabling completions that respect tool-use schemas and function-calling conventions rather than generic code patterns
vs alternatives: Faster inference than larger models (GPT-4, Claude) due to 24B size while maintaining engineering-specific accuracy through specialized fine-tuning, making it suitable for latency-sensitive IDE integrations
Generates infrastructure-as-code (Terraform, CloudFormation, Kubernetes manifests) and DevOps scripts from natural language specifications. The model learns cloud provider APIs and configuration patterns to produce valid, deployable infrastructure code with proper resource dependencies and security configurations.
Unique: Trained on infrastructure-as-code repositories and cloud provider documentation, enabling generation of production-ready configurations that respect cloud provider best practices and resource dependencies
vs alternatives: Produces more complete and deployable infrastructure code than general LLMs by understanding cloud provider semantics and resource relationships, reducing manual configuration overhead
Analyzes source code and generates human-readable explanations, docstrings, and technical documentation by mapping code tokens to semantic intent through transformer attention. The model produces documentation in multiple formats (docstrings, markdown, inline comments) by conditioning on code structure and generating natural language descriptions of logic flow and purpose.
Unique: Specialized training on software engineering documentation patterns enables generation of docstrings that follow language-specific conventions (PEP 257 for Python, JSDoc for JavaScript) and include parameter descriptions, return types, and exception documentation automatically
vs alternatives: Produces more concise and engineering-focused documentation than general-purpose LLMs by filtering for technical accuracy and standard documentation formats, reducing post-generation editing overhead
Identifies bugs and suggests fixes by analyzing code structure, error messages, and execution context through transformer-based pattern matching against known bug categories. The model correlates error traces with code patterns to propose root causes and remediation strategies, leveraging training data that includes bug-fix pairs and error-handling patterns.
Unique: Trained on software engineering debugging workflows and error-fix datasets, enabling pattern recognition of common bug categories (off-by-one errors, null pointer dereferences, type mismatches) with engineering-specific reasoning rather than generic text analysis
vs alternatives: Produces more actionable debugging suggestions than general LLMs by focusing on code-specific error patterns and suggesting concrete fixes rather than generic explanations
Evaluates code quality, style compliance, and architectural patterns by analyzing code against learned best practices and design patterns. The model applies transformer attention to identify violations of common standards (naming conventions, complexity metrics, security patterns) and generates structured feedback with severity levels and remediation suggestions.
Unique: Specialized training on code review datasets and engineering best practices enables detection of architectural anti-patterns and design issues beyond simple style violations, with severity scoring calibrated to software engineering standards
vs alternatives: Provides more contextual and actionable feedback than static analysis tools by understanding code intent and suggesting refactorings that improve maintainability, whereas linters focus only on syntax and style
Understands and translates code across multiple programming languages by learning language-agnostic abstract syntax patterns and semantic equivalences. The model maps code constructs (loops, conditionals, function definitions) to their equivalents in target languages, enabling code translation, language migration, and cross-language documentation.
Unique: Trained on parallel code corpora across 10+ languages with explicit focus on semantic equivalence rather than syntactic mapping, enabling idiomatic translations that respect target language conventions and libraries
vs alternatives: Produces more idiomatic translations than rule-based transpilers by understanding semantic intent and applying language-specific best practices, though still requires manual review for production code
Generates unit tests, integration tests, and test cases from function signatures, docstrings, and code implementations using learned patterns from test datasets. The model produces test code that covers common scenarios (happy path, edge cases, error conditions) by analyzing code logic and generating assertions that validate expected behavior.
Unique: Trained on test-driven development datasets and testing best practices, enabling generation of tests that follow framework conventions (pytest fixtures, Jest mocks) and cover common failure modes identified in engineering practice
vs alternatives: Generates more comprehensive test suites than simple template-based approaches by analyzing code logic to identify edge cases, whereas generic LLMs produce basic happy-path tests only
+3 more capabilities
Dynamically switches between fast-inference and extended-reasoning modes during generation, allowing the model to allocate computational budget based on query complexity. The model learns to route simple queries through direct generation paths while complex reasoning tasks trigger iterative chain-of-thought processing, implemented via a learned gating mechanism that predicts reasoning necessity before token generation begins.
Unique: Implements learned gating mechanism for automatic reasoning mode selection rather than fixed routing rules or user-specified flags, enabling the model to discover optimal reasoning allocation patterns during training on diverse task distributions
vs alternatives: More efficient than standard chain-of-thought models (which always reason) and more capable than fast-only models (which never reason) by learning when reasoning is actually necessary
Generates multi-step reasoning chains with explicit intermediate steps, leveraging the 70B parameter scale to maintain coherence across long reasoning sequences. When activated, the model produces verbose step-by-step explanations with intermediate conclusions, implemented via training on synthetic reasoning datasets and reinforced through process-reward modeling to prefer logically sound intermediate steps.
Unique: Combines 70B parameter scale with process-reward modeling to maintain reasoning coherence across 10+ step chains, whereas smaller models typically degrade after 3-4 steps due to context drift and accumulated errors
vs alternatives: Produces more reliable multi-step reasoning than GPT-3.5 while being more cost-effective than GPT-4 for reasoning tasks, with explicit step visibility that proprietary models don't expose
Mistral: Devstral Small 1.1 scores higher at 24/100 vs Nous: Hermes 4 70B at 24/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Answers factual and reasoning-based questions by retrieving relevant knowledge and applying logical deduction. The model combines pattern matching from training data with reasoning chains to synthesize answers, particularly effective when questions require multi-step inference or combining information from multiple domains.
Unique: Combines dense knowledge from 70B parameters with learned reasoning patterns, enabling both factual recall and multi-step inference without requiring external knowledge bases for simple questions
vs alternatives: More self-contained than RAG-based systems for general knowledge questions; stronger reasoning than GPT-3.5 for complex multi-step problems
Analyzes sentiment and extracts opinions from text, classifying emotional tone and identifying specific viewpoints or attitudes. The model recognizes sentiment markers (words, phrases, context) and generates structured sentiment labels (positive/negative/neutral) with confidence scores and supporting evidence.
Unique: Uses contextual understanding from 70B parameters to recognize sentiment in complex linguistic contexts (sarcasm, negation, mixed opinions) rather than relying on keyword matching or shallow pattern recognition
vs alternatives: More nuanced than rule-based sentiment tools; comparable to fine-tuned BERT models but with better handling of complex linguistic phenomena
Identifies and extracts named entities (people, organizations, locations, dates, etc.) from text, classifying them into semantic categories. The model recognizes entity boundaries and types through learned patterns from training data, generating structured output with entity spans and classifications.
Unique: Uses contextual embeddings from 70B parameters to disambiguate entity boundaries and types based on surrounding context, rather than relying on gazetteer matching or shallow pattern recognition
vs alternatives: More accurate than spaCy NER for complex entity types; comparable to fine-tuned BERT models but with better generalization to unseen entity types
Identifies potentially harmful, inappropriate, or policy-violating content including hate speech, violence, adult content, and misinformation. The model applies learned safety patterns to classify content risk levels and flag problematic material, implemented through instruction-tuning on safety datasets and reinforcement learning from human feedback on safety preferences.
Unique: Trained on diverse safety datasets with RLHF to recognize context-dependent harms (e.g., discussing violence in historical context vs. inciting violence), rather than simple keyword matching or rule-based filtering
vs alternatives: More context-aware than keyword-based filters; comparable to OpenAI's moderation API but with lower latency and no external API dependency
Executes complex multi-part instructions with precise output formatting, using instruction-tuning techniques to reliably parse structured prompts and generate outputs matching specified schemas. The model was trained on diverse instruction datasets with explicit format specifications, enabling it to follow JSON schemas, XML structures, markdown formatting, and code block requirements with high consistency.
Unique: Instruction-tuned on 70B scale with explicit format examples in training data, enabling reliable multi-format output without requiring external grammar constraints or post-processing validation layers
vs alternatives: More reliable at format compliance than base Llama 3.1 70B while avoiding the latency overhead of constrained decoding libraries like outlines or guidance
Generates syntactically correct code across 20+ programming languages and performs refactoring tasks like optimization, style conversion, and bug fixing. Built on Llama 3.1's code training, enhanced with instruction-tuning for code-specific tasks, the model maintains language-specific idioms and best practices through learned patterns from diverse codebases.
Unique: 70B parameter scale enables context-aware code generation that tracks variable types and function signatures across 4K+ token contexts, whereas smaller models lose type information after ~1K tokens
vs alternatives: Comparable to Copilot for single-file generation but stronger at multi-file refactoring due to larger context window; more cost-effective than Claude for routine code tasks
+6 more capabilities