Mistral raises €3B

6 hours ago (mistral.ai)

Mistral is an interesting AI company because they clearly have a contrarian business strategy to the other AI labs. They're also landing big customers in Europe for the right reasons. People dump on them because they're not benchmaxxxing which is pretty shortsighted - do you really want to be in a benchmark arms race with China, or do you want to make money and deploy sovereign AI compute in Europe?

  • When Apple is not racing for the frontier it's a strategy, but when it's Mistral it's a mistake.

    The two companies have read the market the same.

    It's always very dangerous for first movers and their investors, and the commodification of intelligence seems even more likely each time a chinese open model release. It's less exciting to do business that way, but if you're building to stand the test of time, it's wiser that way.

    • I am not sure it's correct to lump apple and Mistral's strategies together. Apple's business is selling hardware/services and their stores, but Mistral's business is AI.

      Apple's strategy seems to be "wait till real business shakes out" but Mistral's strategy seems to be "go after profitable niches and avoid unwinnable fights".

      2 replies →

    • > When Apple is not racing for the frontier it's a strategy, but when it's Mistral it's a mistake.

      I think what Mistral is doing is smart within their financial constraints, but this comparison is misleading. Mistral is an LLM company; Apple is a consumer hardware and services company.

      It's smart for Apple not to join the LLM arms race, because they can just pick the cheapest supplier and let other companies take the financial losses. Mistral is in a very different situation; they are the supplier.

      2 replies →

    • Apple _owns_ computers in people's pockets. There are very few businesses that can match this value. What does Mistral own? A head start at best. For the record I like Mistral and hope they succeed, but you're comparing apples to oranges.

      3 replies →

    • They are not the same kind of companies but they benefit both in their own way of the same market reading.

      Apple is fine-tunning Gemini to customize Siri for their customers. They improve what's between the model and their customers : fine tune, inference up to the product. This is exactly what Mistral is doing, with an even more diversity of usage and needs because they are business oriented, instead of customer oriented. This is also what make them economically very efficient in comparison.

      Beside Apple is still doing science experiments while Mistral is capable of releasing commercial models, albeit small and specialized.

      Don't get me wrong, it's absolutely obvious that Apple is incredibly powerful, now more than ever. But the way they see the future, Mistral have a leaner trajectory.

    • Apple is in an entirely different market than Mistral (consumer electronics vs AI lab focusing on enterprise consulting). Which obviously means their optimal strategies are different. It doesn't really matter for Apple if it's Gemini or other model running behind their AI features. If anything it saves them a lot of money and provides a lot of flexibility.

    • One is a AI company first, the other has tons of other services and they can just buy those outright.

    • One is american, the other is european

      It's the same with gaming

      When Microsoft is killing physical in 2023 to push for Gamepass and digital only, it's labeled as "progress and infrastructure planning", when it's Sony that does it, it's labeled as "greed and anti consumerism"

      Hopefully more people get attentive to how the industry & the media works, and how US Big Tech manages to kill any form of alternative

    • AI company not keeping up with AI companies is by no definition the same as combinedhardwaresoftwareservicesentertainmentlifestyletechcompany not keeping up with AI companies

    • Apple tried at AI integration and fumbled the bag repeatedly.

      In 2010s, they were among the "greats" of consumer AI. After 2022, they kept trying, and just had delays and underperformance. I don't think their actions now are "strategy" and not "skill issue".

    • > When Apple is not racing for the frontier it's a strategy, but when it's Mistral it's a mistake.

      Apple is a $4.7 trillion company selling computers and iPhones. How many computers and iPhones is Mistral selling?

      In your comparison Apple is Apple while Mistral is orange.

    • Yea people tend to give Apple the benefit of the doubt because they’re the most successful and valuable company in human history.

      Mistral is not Apple, and is not emulating their strategy. Please show me Mistral’s half a $Trillion in yearly revenue coming from consumer hardware/software.

      Then I’ll agree with you that they’re taking the Apple strategy.

  • I root for Mistral and hope they'll be successful, perhaps I'll buy a subscription too once they're good enough for coding aid (perhaps they are now, didn't do any test with their models recently).

    First of all, they release the models' weights, perdonally I don't consider any other option as viable (no OpenAI and definitely no Anthropic, thank you).

    I especially like their Vibe Chat web offer, the allowed monthly usage with a free account is incredibly generous (still have to hit a limit) and the deep research feature (5/month for free) is also valuable.

    I don't know anything about the alleged regulation maxxing problems, I don't perceive them as a problem for my causal/personal usage anyway.

    • > once they're good enough for coding aid

      The gap has only been increasing, though. Devstral 2 was obviously not great compared to Claude/GPT but kind of acceptable if you were willing to compromise. There has been no real progress since then and frontier labs are massively ahead.

  • I don't care about benchmarks. Benchmarks show that Opus 5 is a stronger model than Fable 5 which is obviously not the case.

    But I do care about capability and so far only Anthropic and, very recently with Astra, OpenAI can deliver on coding quality. And capability matters immensely. There is a world of difference between being able to do something and not being able.

  • They are regulationmaxxing instead of benchmaxxing, that's my problem with them.

    • After living in the US for several years, I was happy to return to the EU where regulations exist to protect against the worst corporate behavior.

      My American bank sold my credit card transactions to advertisers. My American mobile operator had insane fees for roaming and other features that are basic in Europe. Sending a bank transfer in America was unreliable and slow and expensive because there was nothing like SEPA instant 24/7 free transfer (I guess FedWire does that nowadays, I don’t know if consumers actually have guaranteed access at all banks like they do in EU).

      When American AI companies become established Fortune 100 members, they’ll start abusing their customers just like all the others in that club, those banks and phone operators and Microsoft and the rest. Google once pretended to be different, now they have the corporate cancer. No reason to believe the same won’t happen to OpenAI and Anthropic.

      8 replies →

    • > They are regulationmaxxing instead of benchmaxxing, that's my problem with them.

      To those who is in know (r/localllama, r/sillytavernai), is well aware that Mistral models - at least the small, <=24b ones - are the least censored, even less than Chinese.

    • It bears repeating - all markets get regulated.

      Markets, left to their own devices, do not end up automatically being competitive in favor of consumers.

      But above all, if AI wasn’t hyped as a threat to humanity, to jobs, to security, regulation could have been cautious.

      To add insult to injury, given how voters are tired of technology, expecting a different move from governments is a losing bet.

      24 replies →

  • This is a bottom feeder mentality. Europe has enough bright people and resources to truly compete in the AI race. There is something wrong when the only selling point is that it's local.

    • We're regularly getting demonstrations that being at the frontier is no moat at all. "Run open weights locally" was literally on the HN front page a few days ago as a primary concern/competitor for the big US labs. So there's a big and meaningful gap between "not frontier" and "bottom feeder". There's just tons of applications where you don't need "the best" model, especially not tomorrow's best model.

      9 replies →

    • To compete, we’d have to throw a lot of the regulations and laws into the trash (especially anything regarding copyright) and do an order of magnitude more investment.

      I’m surprised that there’s no domestic chip production either, we don’t have our own CPUs or GPUs, meanwhile China is spinning up manufacturing so they don’t have to work around the Nvidia export restrictions as much.

      I like Mistral and there’s cool stuff going on like how EuroLLM models know Latvian language and all the other EU ones better than way bigger models, but we don’t have anything frontier.

      At the very least, they should be distilling Kimi K3 and GLM 5.3 as much as possible and working on MoE models like ~35B and ~120B versions to match Qwen.

      3 replies →

    • We're not in a good position on the supply chain needed. Right now it really means pouring billions on American corps, either by renting the compute or by building it. That would be mostly fine if it were only VC money but it's not.

      1 reply →

    • No, Europe doesn't have the capital markets required to build the required data centers. Underwriting gigawatt data centers and frontier models demands a fully realized European Capital Markets Union, a single energy regulator with cross-border grid integration, and shared fiscal borrowing power.

      4 replies →

  • Mistral doesn't look like it's benching at all. They're just as well funded as a lot of Chinese labs doing much more interesting work R&D-wise. Tailoring products for compliance doesn't cut it IMO, but I'm not in their shoes.

  • >They're also landing big customers in Europe for the right reasons.

    We've been migrating all of our AI automations from Gemini to Mistral because of the fear of data transfer regulations. Maybe they don't apply to us (we don't really feed personal data to AI), but we can't afford to find out.

    It's been quite annoying too because the Mistral documentation and dashboards are all over the place.

    Fear of fines... that's not what I would call "the right reasons".

  • > clearly have a contrarian business strategy to the other AI labs

    What’s contrarian? Dont they also sell API and subscription like every other lab?

  • I also think their business model is interesting in that they can also serve Chinese models e.g GLM and fine tune them for enterprises.

    which is a market Chinese labs won't get into.

    they only other company they compete with is probably palantir in that regard.

  • Realistically they will have to deploy the Chinese models or their finetuned versions though since their models are completely out of date and not competitive. Outside of maybe government contracts it will be hard to compete against Azure/AWS who promise to run their models in EU datacenters and not store any data since actual companies normally prefer frontier models with decent performance (cost/performance is pretty decent as well if you are fine with e.g. Luna which is massively better than anything Mistral can offer).

    • There are two separate issues here. One of which is very simple. That issue is where to run the models. For many companies this has to be in the EU, on EU terms. Mostly, this is not really optional from a compliance point of view. It's why all the big cloud providers have data centers in places like Frankfurt, Amsterdam, etc. and why a lot of new data centers are being built in Ireland. Of course a lot of those investments are being made by US companies. But they all have legal entities in the EU because otherwise they'd have no business here. And they can't afford to miss out on that business because it's a huge market.

      The second one is about which model to run and who controls and oversees quality control. OpenAI and Anthropic seem to insist that only they can do that. But of course here in the EU we see that a bit differently. The big US based hyper-scalers are neither liked nor trusted here at this point. We don't trust the Chinese model makers much either. But with open weight models, we can at least pick different models and run them on our own terms.

      Also, what most companies need is not necessarily the latest fashionable model straight from the Silicon Valley cat walk but something that will work reliably and predictably for years. Factories are not going to install the latest model in their production lines every few weeks. Same with most banks, insurers, etc. I actually know people that do business with those in relation to AI development in Germany. Companies like that are very much obsessing about self hosting their models. Sending customer data off premises is a big concern for them. They are building stuff that will be used for many years. In five years, nobody will care which model was best in autumn of 2026. But a lot of software built this year that uses AI might still be running.

      You have to see Mistral's investment in that context. They could make a lot of money in the EU if they do a decent enough job. Lots of conservative companies here that are going to pick something that's good enough and then they'll be using that for many years.

  • Is it really contrarian though? Cohere, Aleph Alpha and many other model companies went that route and are doing well

  • With how they’re currently being used we might as well call them bendmarks.

    Every newly released model is paraded as SOTA showing peak or near peak performance on cherry-picked bendmarks the model was either fine-tuned on, or tested under specific conditions optimal for that model.

  • How you know that they are not realy benchmaxxxing? Maybe they just have skill issue in this olimpics.

  • I tried them via OpenRouter. I loved their OCR. I really disliked their code generation. It was about six months ago -- so it was a geological era ago in this world. However Mistral is legally favored in Europe. In fact from my point of view , using them presents no trouble with GDPR (I live and work in Europe). I'm NOT a lawyer but I'm a technician that define itself 'privacy savy'.

  • are you saying current frontier AI labs is benchmaxxxing and not because the AI model is good ?????

    You crazy to think that Fable and Astra capabilities is fake

  • I fail to see how this is relevant with regards to areas.

    Whether AI is hosted by the USA, Europe or China - they all are awful and eliminating real jobs while also driving up RAM prices etc... Why should I want to support any of these?

    • Because it's increasingly obvious that this is the next step in our capabilities as humans competing with that of the discovery of bacteria and transistors.

      1 reply →

    • Because humanity stalled out- and coasted for the last 50 years and it shows. And now it must compete and git good or git gone. No more fat ponies paraded as race-horses.

      3 replies →

Mistral is not that bad as the comments here suggest. I am not using it as a frontier model but with simple RAG tasks and its doing great. Also OCR is pretty decent. It's a positive development that Europe is at least trying. Alternative would be: do nothing.

  • The problem is that they're in a weird position between US models and Chinese models. Not as performant as US models, not as cheap as Chinese models.

    Especially as Chinese models are getting better Mistral is getting less and less relevant.

    It pains me because I want them to succeed, but despite them denying it I believe they'll end up restrict their activity to (1) selling hosting for Chinese models (they're already hosting GLM) and (2) selling AI-related consultant service (they're also doing that already).

    • If there’s one thing the legacy, dying industrial companies of Europe love, it’s consulting.

      So they’ll probably make more money creating PowerPoints with ChatGPT than they will trying to compete with the US and China.

      Which would be the most European outcome ever.

      5 replies →

  • > Europe is at least trying

    Which is interesting since who are the investors and what exactly are their roles? Samsung - European? BlackRock - European? Salesforce Ventures - European? Etc.

    So yes it might well be

    > [...] the largest equity fundraising round ever completed by a European technology company, three years after the company's launch.

    but the money isn't European.

  • Mistral is odd. They have made mostly flops, boring models (Ministral 3, Mistral Small 4, Small 3, Small 3.1) together with a classic masterpiece Mistral Nemo and very good Mistral Large 2407, Mistral Small 22b, Mistral Small 3.2.

  • When it comes to what really matters, they're far behind and probably will not catch up. It is my conviction that in this space, if you're not the best in the world, you're losing. Everyone is fundamentally selling the same thing, so if you don't have the most intelligent or cheapest model in the world, you're losing. Sure, Mistral has a "Made in Europe" edge, but any open-weight self-hosted chinese model might as well have been made by Von der Leyen herself.

    Also, €3B is nothing in this market, especially when you're competing with more efficient competitors. €3B in Europe is probably the same as €10B in the USA and €20B or €30B in China.

    • > It is my conviction that in this space, if you're not the best in the world, you're losing

      I disagree on that point. Models are getting good enough that you can switch them and barely notice. I'm switching between Opus, GPT Codex and GLM 5.3 for coding and I can barely tell the difference.

      I think they'll become more like telcos than anything, selling a commodity. It's even truer when any provider can host open weight models like GLM-5.3.

      Basically a world with dozens of Baseten, with AI labs having a hard time monetizing, just like editors of open source software.

      2 replies →

    • I don't get it when people all claim that AGI is a winner takes all game. It is not (unless it is used as a weapon). When one company reaches AGI, there will be a dozen very close to AGI, given time. Also a winner is not going to drive everyone else out of business, it is the opposite, one winner will have people betting on the second and the third winners, the technology will also help other develops. Once you have a good enough model, everything will be incremental. I think the hardware capability will be the real burden, not the model itself. If AGI is as powerful as it sounds, maybe hardware won't be a problem any more.

      1 reply →

    • Europe is a different beast. They build and distribute rails, they don’t compete on frontier capabilities. When the civic benefits of AI become clear, EU is in a position to mandate their distribution. US develops capabilities that remain stuck in heterogeneous corporate silos without interop. Payments is a good point of comparisons between the two approaches.

    • Well, then Samsung Electronics appears to be dumb for leading this investment round? They probably only do it because they're European...oh, wait...

      > so if you don't have the most intelligent or cheapest model in the world, you're losing

      So how does this match up to the fact that there is currently OpenAI and Anthropic, both raking in money? They can't both have the smartest model at the same time, can they? And all those inference companies selling API access to open weight models on OpenRouter, which are apparently also earning billions already? While the former are probably bound to have much higher cost for research and training than they are currently earning, which may be called "losing", the latter don't have that problem, they can simply price their API access such that the money earned covers their costs, no training and practically no research necessary. In your theory these companies shouldn't have a cent of earnings.

      5 replies →

  • That's kinda damning with faint praise, but I agree, I am glad to see something. I've been disappointed in their coding ability -- it's where I'm most focused, I've built and we are selling a (specialised) coding agent -- and hopefully investment will give them the ability to achieve more in their research and model development.

    They have been focusing largely on government and business not consumer, which is fine. Perhaps coding is not something they want to achieve, but they do provide Codestral. It's a signal it's a market of interest to them.

  • "Do nothing, win." is already China's strategy after all. Though they are far from doing nothing in the LLM space.

  • Europe could tell ASML to put kill switches in GPUs so Europe has leverage to "safeguard" AI deployments in other countries.

    • Ehm, sorry, but no, this is not how lithography works. You cannot "hide" functionality in circuitry your machines are producing if your machines' job is to shine light through a mask.

      You'd have to be the producer of the machine producing the mask. Or, even better, the software that produces the plan according to which a machine produces a mask.

      1 reply →

I love Mistral and I use it whenever I don't care about quality. For example, it's my go to model for generating git commit messages by leveraging their free codestral model.

I wouldn't pay for it though.

Europe absolutely needs a home-grown AI lab, especially with Pax Americana looking increasingly shaky.

LLMs embody value systems, and American and European values are not the same (yes, there are overlaps, but also key differences).

More nefariously, I can also imagine LLMs that silently degrade their reasoning when used in a national security context of a non-US country.

So, Mistral may not be competitive with OpenAI and Anthropic, but in many contexts that doesn’t matter. And, perhaps this gap could be closed with more funding (the three billion funding figure is a rounding error next to US labs). I’m sort of surprised that the EU isn’t stepping in to support them.

  • > Europe absolutely needs a home-grown AI lab, especially with Pax Americana looking increasingly shaky.

    The only problem (at least in the LLM space) is that you can do more in Europe by just getting the best Chinese Open weights model (do a finetune if you really want) and do more for cheaper than using Mistral.

  • Europe has no budget of their own like the USA and China do, because there is no debt nor taxation at the European level. That’s the reason for the complication you are noticing.

  • > LLMs embody value systems, and American and European values are not the same (yes, there are overlaps, but also key differences).

    There are also some areas where values across Europe are quite divergent. Think LGBT rights and social acceptance, religion & secularism, immigration & multiculturalism.

    And countries don’t fall into neat “liberal west vs conservative east”. Spain is exceptionally liberal on LGBT issues while remaining more religious than some northern countries; Denmark is socially liberal but has adopted relatively restrictive immigration policies.

    • > Spain is exceptionally liberal on LGBT issues while remaining more religious than some northern countries

      When you move here, "more religious" turns out to pretty much be window dressing. Yes, they still celebrate a bunch of the old catholic holidays, parading saints around on feast days, but apart from a handful of older folks, nobody actually believes.

      Particularly when compared to the US, where a large minority is still going around loudly thumping bibles, Spain is a very secular country.

    • You are conflating two concepts into one words, immigration and illegal immigration are not the same thing

  • >I’m sort of surprised that the EU isn’t stepping in to support them.

    On a similar note: Why does it have to be the EU to step up?

    Why doesn't EU rather speed up making VC investments more attractive, so that EU and banks don't do the majority of investing?

    *I don't have answers to these questions. It just frustrates me how many investments here come from politicians and banks, rather than from investors, people, and companies.

    • It’s a different culture with different rules, if it was that easy it would have been done already. See my other comment about lack of budget at a federal level.

  • > LLMs embody value systems, and American and European values are not the same

    Your values and American values might not be the same, but to say even most of Europe feels the same way is a big stretch. And not even the US has very many shared values anymore.

    If we’re being honest, Europe doesn’t actually have much of a common value system outside of whatever is momentarily trendy in the urban monoculture, which is why it refuses to work together on most things and is currently being torn apart at the seams (see the rise of nationalist far right parties in most states).

    The EU are a collection of states where the average citizen can’t even communicate with their neighbor in a common language beyond the level of a 4 year old. How could they possibly be aligned on a value system in the same way the US is.

Mistral has solid OCR, STT and TTS models and I would love to support them by switching with all of our business workloads to Mistral... but their LLM models are sadly not competitive at all. In our business benchmarks their Mistral Medium 3.5 with reasoning is worse than Gemma 4 31B and Glimmer 30B. It's a 128B dense model that's priced accordingly! Mistral Small 4 is way worse than Gemma 4 26B A4B. I applaude the effort that they release those models as open weight but Gemma 4 models are currently way easier to run with more tok/s and less hardware. Their API pricing is just insane for what you get. But I guess enterprise customers don't care about it, this is why they are probably not lowering it.

  • > Mistral Small 4 is way worse than Gemma 4 26B A4B

    Depends for what purpose? I found large Mistrals are massively better than Gemma 4 at creative writing: have more natural tone, better consistency than 26B as it is MoE.

Last I saw job offers for mistral (engineering, Paris) it advertised 90k euros base salary. Not sure how they’re intending to compete with the US when even a top AI lab can’t afford to be competitive :-/

  • > Last I saw job offers for mistral (engineering, Paris) it advertised 90k euros base salary. Not sure how they’re intending to compete with the US when even a top AI lab can’t afford to be competitive :-/

    Does the US position come with 5 weeks paid vacation? When the US position gets hit with layoffs, do you still have comprehensive healthcare and unemployment coverage?

    Yes, EU software Eng salaries are a lot lower than their US equivalents, but quite a lot of folks are happy having a top 5% salary in their own county, without all the stresses and risks of working in the US.

    As a concrete example, a few years back it leaked that Dan Abramov's (very decent) London salary was half what his US peers earned. Didn't seem to bother the man much at all...

    • Pay isn't the main problem with Paris, it's quality of life.

      Housing near work is mostly old Haussmannian buildings that are rent capped and where demand far exceeds supply, so most of the stock is unmaintained. You either accept bad housing in the city or live in the suburbs and commute — not ideal.

      To make matters worse, French companies (especially old-school ones) have a culture of presenteeism for white collar jobs, it's uncommon for people to leave before 6PM and staying late is rewarded as high engagement.

      Lastly, you might consider buying and renovating a house so you can escape this dilemma, but it isn't cheap: 2-bedroom (T3) around 700k euros, that represents 20 years of frugal savings on 90k gross.

      Vacation, cheap and good healthcare, and unemployment benefits are great in France, but the current government has been eroding these social benefits, and those are not unique to France for well-paid tech workers anyway.

    • > quite a lot of folks are happy having a top 5% salary in their own county, without all the stresses and risks of working in the US.

      Yes, absolutely, the problem is these are not the people you want to hire.

      And the people you do want to hire are either already in US or work for a US company remotely for 3x the salary.

    • > When the US position gets hit with layoffs, do you still have comprehensive healthcare and unemployment coverage?

      What does this have to do if the advertised base salary? You would pay for your healthcare and social security with huge taxes from that already meager salary, it is not like those 90k is all-taxes-paid-and-batteries-included offer.

    • > Does the US position come with 5 weeks paid vacation? When the US position gets hit with layoffs, do you still have comprehensive healthcare and unemployment coverage?

      Work a US job for 4 months, quit, take the next 8 months for holiday/vacation, and you still save more money than a European SWE.

      Hey, the 2010s are calling, they want the trope “BuT eUrOpE hAs pAiD lEaVe” back.

      Europe in 2026 (France, Germany, UK, Estonia, etc). What a joke. Nobody in the world respects them.

      At least the US has jobs and a military. Not as good as before, but better than Europe.

  • That's pretty high for engineering in France though. Most engineers by far are way below that there, this is top management level.

  • In Germany AFAIK their Senior base salary ceiling is ~ 180k EUR - approx 210k USD for an Engineering role.

    Thats quite competitive for a base salary, as high as max ICT5 Staff base at Apple Munich.

    • And 180k in Germany, even in Berlin is pretty good. You are living a very good life with that salary.

  • There's more to life than money past a certain point, I'd rather live in the Alps on a lower salary.

    • I imagine you could do so while working for an US AI Lab in Zurich for five times the net pay.

    • You dont even live in the Alps with 90K lmao. And if you expect top performance, you should expect top salary. Or at least something competitive. 90K for a company like Mistral is a bit embarrassing.

      2 replies →

  • > Not sure how they’re intending to compete with the US when even a top AI lab can’t afford to be competitive.

    It probably means they don't, they just do their own thing how they see fit.

  • some people would rather live in paris than los angels or san francisco (and rightly so, if you ask me)...

    • I actually live in Paris and get your point, but at some point you have to face the reality of the market/industry and really try your best to get good folks to join, especially in the current climate where US researchers may be looking for greener pastures.

      2 replies →

    • US software companies (Google, Meta, MS, etc) have offices in Paris and they pay way more than that. Especially if you take into account total comp (Mistral is private so any stocks you get are "locked" until IPO or sell out)

      Yes 90k is more than most French software companies pay, but the salary needs to be competitive with those US companies.

      3 replies →

    • But you should be able to hire most of the people you want, not just some that happen to pick Paris.

      Also, if given a choice of 90k eur in Paris vs let's say 2m usd in US I'm pretty sure suddenly most of the issues people have with US would suddenly disappear ;)

Mistral's annual revenue (700M) is what Anthropic generates in 3 days. It will be extremely difficult to build new models with these numbers.

  • Mistral just needs to good enough category think all those flash models or Qwen3.8 27b which they sadly aren't at the moment, that plus being European lab will mean that they will have very nice business. Even now these SOTA models feel too overkill for most tasks.

  • And GLM local models can eat Anthropic's lunch just like both eat OpenAI's.

    Mistral's revenue is mostly B2B, and that's much more difficult to move.

No amount of $ would improve mistral if they cant fix fundamental flaws. They aren't even on par with chinese models a year ago.

  • I actually believe the amount of $ is what was missing for them to improve their fundamental flaws. They're a very competent team, but were working with a tiny fraction of the budget of US/China teams.

  • If Mistral aren't going to distill other people's large models they obviously need to train their own large models. This obviously requires money for optimization, tuning and training hardware.

  • They've started hosting GLM-5.2, that should be very telling of their capabilities at the moment. Hopefully the investment will allow them to hire the right people to become competitive.

  • can you elaborate what are their fundamental flaws that are not fixable by funds?

    • Chinese models are trained on dubiously collected model traces from Claude/OpenAI that are purchased from model routers. All the major Chinese models use this data. That's one reason they've been able to catch up with Anthropic/OpenAI so quickly, they have so much data.

      Mistral can't train on that data, because this data would be illegal to purchase & train on in the EU.

    • > can you elaborate what are their fundamental flaws that are not fixable by funds?

      Culture.

      In terms of output, EU working culture is inferior to American/Chinese working culture.

      Work life balance is irrelevant for frontier/sovereign AI.

      9 replies →

  • There is nothing exciting about mistral but they're the only european ai lab i've even heard off (jeppa doesn't count)

    • there was "H" at paris at the time, they raised 200M or so, but never got so much visibility. don't know at which stage they are now or if they accomplished something

      1 reply →

  • Honestly being only 1 year behind makes me an optimist. You’re telling me Europe can be slightly behind with 1000x less capex and way more sustainable economics? Awesome. The world moves slower than AI progresses, I can see a scenario where 1 year isn’t a problem.

    • Chinese models are open, available to distill, and they also publish papers about their research. Being one year behind is a skill issue.

      I think the most of the money would go to purchase hardware, But I hope they can start making adequate compensation for AI engineers and researchers to move forward.

      4 replies →

> Existing investors a16z

I don't trust anything the antichrist invests in

  • Is that who Thiel is talking about? I thought it was just a bible thing.

    • No, Thiel is talking about the UN and global minimum taxes when he talks about the Antichrist.

    • If you follow the ideology of the Silicon Valley billionaire types, based around Ayn Rand (eg “Atlas Shrugged”) and Curtis Yarvin, as well as what Thiel himself has said over the years, the Antichrist is governmental institutions, seen as the inhibitors of progress. I am not joking btw.

      9 replies →

  • This is why wealth should be less concentrated. A few people has their hands in all businesses and that will end badly.

    Taxation is not just about paying for the costs of the country, it is also about making sure that nobody has enough power to subjugate the will of the people. Monopolies, billionaires, the accumulation of such power is making the average citizen powerless. And you can feel it.

    • The power is in the hands of a few people obsessed or possessed. Gambling addiction, narcissism, power hunger.

      Taxation will not solve this before the global society collapses so the question is whether we figure out a way to level the power.

      This is not evil, but a trait of human nature of corruption or addiction to power.

      4 replies →

    • > the will of the people.

      there is so such thing.

      if there is it sure is very flexible and forgetful

I get worried when thinking about Mistral because they make mediocre models and I don't think they will be able to defeat their competition.

  • Same here. And I doubt 3B EUR will do anything (remember the >$100B investment round that OpenAI got?)

    In the EU it seems we are very much at risk of being cut off from frontier AI if the US government should decide to do so.

    • Blocking EU from those services would crash the valuation of US AI companies, so I'm not expecting it to happen.

    • You'd still have access to the Chinese models though right? Even if you want to argue they aren't truly SOTA they're still pretty dang good.

  • They’re in the EU. If they are a year or so behind and things start to plateau they’ll catch up. Americans perhaps don’t realize we can also tariff their digital goods to protect our own. There is a scenario where Americans and Chinese foot the bill and EU gets out cheap, e.g. similar to the Apple approach to AI.

For all that say Mistral is "at least something" for EU: where are the big EU-owned datacenters where we can run Chinese SOTA models safely, and labs that fork and quantize them on EU data? Wouldn't that be "more something"? Even if this method still depends on external resources short term, it's a money problem, and EU just loves pouring money on problems.

It makes no sense to train frontier models from scratch anymore. The best frontier models are only a half year ahead of Chinese open models. In this regard Anthropic and OpenAI are also in a bad spot when they waste so much compute on training models.

An important factor is that fine tuning existing open models is incredible cheap. You can easily change any cultural biases if you want a model to be 'sovereign'. And Mistral could combine that with their custom data sets for their enterprise customer needs. Mistral still trains their own models, but they also seem to offer fine tuning existing models.

With model weights being commoditized, another differentiator could be deploying efficient inference chips, especially if you combine it with a developer ecosystem for vendor lock-in. That is why it is interesting that both Samsung and ASML are investors, since they are companies that could make a difference in this area.

  • It only makes sense to train a frontier model if you are trying a different architecture to one that is available from an existing frontier model. This is because the different model architecture will learn the weights differently.

    It may make sense to train a frontier model on an existing architecture if the base model is not available and the instruction trained version doesn't fit with what you want. There are techniques like ablation, but those could have other effects on the model, and there can still be lingering effects of the instruction training in the model that surface less frequently (e.g. on an input not covered by the ablation training).

    Otherwise, fine tuning is definitely the way to go. However, you need to be careful not to over-tune the model such that it is only tuned to the data you are training it on.

10-20x more still needed, and then somewhere to build a couple DCs. Fingers crossed they make it, neither US nor Chinese labs can be trusted, even with open weights.

That’s great, but meanwhile American competitors are worth… trillions?

  • At this stage it's not about how much it's worth, but how much investment is required to reach their goals.

  • Nah. They are not, everyone is losing money, and just staying alive from gov subsidies. A claude PRO license is 20 usd/month, and for it to be profitable it should be somewhere around 200-300/month.

    The bubble is going to burst soon.

    • I think the Pro and other subs allow them to save big on ads (Claude Code use is required and it pushes their ads) and allow easy access to free data (CC occasionally solicits feedback and session sharing, which I'm pretty sure some users oblige). Also CC does massive prompt caching tailored to work in lockstep with their platform. With all that and who knows what else, I'd say it balances over time.

I really hope that Mistral will catch up. I'm left wondering why so many Chinese labs manage to be competitive.

Perhaps Mistral has too high moral standards to keep up?

I really do hope they can catch up with the American models, but I think setting the Chinese models as the goal would be best. They seems to be able to create great models with low cost that are probably useful for 90% of the day to day tasks. Mistral should not focus on competing with Claude Fable or OpenAI's Astra at first but have a good EU alternative to Opus or even Sonnet. The fact that it's European will be enough to be used by a lot of companies and governments in the EU that are (trying to) move away from US tech.

  • > but have a good EU alternative to Opus or even Sonnet

    They would if they could, which means they can‘t, even though they want to.

Surely outfits like Sakana will be looking at a similar strategy. The White House / Anthropic spat supercharged all this.

"Mistral raises €3B to make sovereign, open-weight AI the technology frontier". Oh yeah, that sounds reasonable, indeed, one receives this much money just for sovereignty's sake.

I've been applying to jobs at Mistral, just straight rejects.

Not even a phone call :(

  • I applied, I had multiple interviews, I got reject because I was bad during them.

    Anyway, the interview process was so janky it decreased my confidence in their success.

  • I’ve heard many folks get rejected and leave with a bad taste in their mouth. Interviews should make you feel like you’ve failed due to you not being quite there while still recommending friends to apply (“I didn’t make it but you should try to apply!” Vs “i felt like I had the privilege of even talking to the dude and then got ghosted”).

  • Instead of trying to get into Mistral, why don't you make your own Mistral?

    Not easy as it sounds yes, but it is better than throwing your CV into the ATS void 1000 times (the wrong way to apply for a job btw)

    Mistral have no moat as it seems except some 'regulatory' moat.

Europes last chance

  • I don't know.

    The moat doesn't seem to exist. Probably safer to stay out of the race for now.

    • Stay out of the race sounds insane when AI is, and will be, a common commodity. China is getting great bang for their buck on AI training, why not the same for Europe?

    • I’m still looking for no-moatists to logically explain why there is no moat in SOTA LLMS.

      That paper released by a lone Google employee 3 years ago still misguiding people it seems.

      3 replies →