Skip to content

model comparison

Best Open Source LLMs: Llama 4 vs Mistral vs DeepSeek Compared

Open source AI is closing the gap with proprietary models. We compare the top contenders you can self-host today.

AI Research Team · May 18, 2026

The Open Source Revolution

Open source LLMs have made extraordinary progress. In 2026, the best open-weight models rival proprietary offerings for many tasks, and they come with the freedom to self-host, fine-tune, and deploy without API dependencies.

Llama 4: Meta's Flagship

Meta's Llama 4 family includes Scout (17B active parameters with 16 experts), Maverick (17B active with 128 experts), and the massive Behemoth (288B active parameters). Llama 4 Maverick is the sweet spot for most deployments. It matches GPT-4o on many benchmarks while running on a single 8xH100 node.

Key strengths: excellent multilingual performance (12 languages natively), strong coding ability, and a 10-million-token context window on Scout. Meta's permissive license allows commercial use with minimal restrictions.

Mistral Large 3

Mistral has carved a niche in the European market and among enterprises concerned about data sovereignty. Mistral Large 3 (123B parameters) delivers strong reasoning and particularly excels at structured output generation: JSON, XML, and function calling are more reliable than most competitors.

The smaller Mistral Medium and Mistral Small models offer excellent performance-per-parameter ratios, making them ideal for edge deployment and resource-constrained environments.

DeepSeek V3 and R1

DeepSeek shocked the industry with its training efficiency: DeepSeek V3 was reportedly trained for under $6 million, a fraction of what Western labs spend. The model uses a Mixture of Experts architecture with 671B total parameters but only 37B active per inference.

DeepSeek R1, the reasoning-focused variant, achieves remarkable performance on math and coding benchmarks, rivaling Claude Opus on AIME and Codeforces problems. The open availability of R1's weights has made it the go-to choice for researchers studying chain-of-thought reasoning.

Performance Benchmarks

On MMLU-Pro, Llama 4 Maverick scores 82.4%, Mistral Large 3 hits 80.1%, and DeepSeek V3 reaches 83.7%. For coding (HumanEval+), DeepSeek V3 leads at 87.2%, followed by Llama 4 Maverick at 85.8% and Mistral at 82.5%.

Self-Hosting Considerations

Running these models requires serious hardware. Llama 4 Maverick needs roughly 200GB of VRAM at FP16. With quantization (AWQ or GPTQ at 4-bit), you can squeeze it onto 2xA100 80GB GPUs. DeepSeek V3 is more demanding due to its architecture but offers the best quality-per-dollar at inference time.

For most teams, the practical choice is between Llama 4 Scout (runs on a single high-end GPU) and managed API access to the larger models through providers like Together AI, Fireworks, or Groq.

The Verdict

DeepSeek V3 leads on raw capability for the price. Llama 4 Maverick offers the best ecosystem support and licensing clarity. Mistral Large 3 is ideal for European deployments and structured output tasks. All three are production-ready in 2026.

Covers

Llama 4MistralDeepSeekopen sourceLLM

Get the report this came from

The Stack Report collects all of this into one document: what the tools cost, what they do, and how to assemble a stack that isn’t three subscriptions doing one job.

Double opt-in: nothing is sent until you confirm. Unsubscribe in one click.

Keep reading

More on this