llama3.1-8b vs mistral-7b on Apple M2 Pro

Compare llama3.1-8b and mistral-7b running locally on Apple M2 Pro (16GB unified) — tokens/sec, VRAM fit, and quality scores for local inference.

Quick answer: mistral-7b is faster on Apple M2 Pro in this dataset (52 vs 48 tok/s decode).

Compare a different combination

llama3.1-8b
48
tok/s (decode)
QuantQ4_K_M
VRAM required5GB
Fits on Apple M2 Pro✓
Quality score48 / 100
Eval sources
DataCommunity benchmark
mistral-7b
52
tok/s (decode)
QuantQ4_K_M
VRAM required4.7GB
Fits on Apple M2 Pro✓
Quality score65 / 100
Eval sources
DataCommunity benchmark
Improve this GPU comparison
Measured llama3.1-8b or mistral-7b on Apple M2 Pro?

Add a source link or correction so this page can rank with real hardware-specific data instead of estimates.

Contribute GPU comparison data

GPU comparison FAQ

Which is faster on Apple M2 Pro: llama3.1-8b or mistral-7b?

mistral-7b is faster on Apple M2 Pro in this dataset (52 vs 48 tok/s decode).

Do both models fit on Apple M2 Pro?

llama3.1-8b: ✓. mistral-7b: ✓. The fit labels use Q4_K_M VRAM estimates and the benchmark data available for this GPU.

How much VRAM do these models need?

llama3.1-8b needs about 5GB in Q4_K_M; mistral-7b needs about 4.7GB in Q4_K_M.

Why can speed differ by GPU?

Local LLM speed depends on GPU memory bandwidth, backend, quantization, context length, and whether the model fits entirely in VRAM or unified memory.

How can I correct this comparison?

Use the GitHub correction link on this page with your GPU, model, quantization, context length, and measured decode tokens per second.

Last updated: 2026-06-16Suggest a correction →GitHub