Best Open Source AI Models for Coding: Efficient and Cost-Effective

Choosing the right AI model for coding can be costly and time-consuming. Most proprietary models work well, but they come with high cost and privacy trade-offs. Thankfully, many cost-effective open-source models are now outperforming closed-source options. That said, engineers and developers often struggle to find a model that offers privacy, accuracy, speed, and cost efficiency.

In this guide, we have ranked the 10 best open-source AI coding models based on capability, efficiency, privacy, and cost. An efficient model delivers the desired output quickly, understands context, and avoids retries.

Here’s the criteria we used to build this list

• Performance on coding benchmarks (LiveCodeBench, SWE-bench, and more)
• Context window size and the ability to handle large codebases
• Speed and latency
• Support for agent workflows and tool use
• Resource usage and the Cost to access via API

Qwen 3 Code - Best For Code Generation and Agentic Development

Qwen 3 Code from Alibaba has become a developer favorite for a reason. The model is purposely built for code generation and agentic software development. It is exceptionally good at Python, JavaScript, C++, Java, and Typescript. It is based on Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Base and uses an MoE architecture.

As stated above, it excels in “agentic” development. In simple terms, Qwen 3 can manage multi-step tasks, execute, and verify its own work.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

Qwen3 Coder weights are open-source and available on Hugging Face for self-hosting at no licensing cost. Alternatively, users can opt for access through providers like Okara.ai at affordable rates.

Ideal For

It is suitable for backend engineers building microservices. In addition, developers can use it for autonomous AI coding agents.

Downside

• Thinking mode slows down responses
• May shows glitches during heavy coding tasks

Try Qwen Code 3 Now!

Deepseek V3.2 Thinking - Great for Debugging and Reasoning Needs

Deepseek V3.3 Thinking helps when code doesn't work, and you can't figure out why. It is a reasoning-enhanced variant of the Deepseek V3.2 series that uses the “Chain of Thought” (CoT) process. Unlike standard models, the model explains its reasoning before suggesting fixes.

Deepseek V3.2 Thinking is invaluable for complex debugging sessions, code reviews, and identifying root causes in multi-layered issues.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

Deepseek V3.2 is completely free and open-source (MIT-licensed). API access is more affordable than closed reasoning models (e.g., Claude 3.7 Sonnet, o3-mini).

As for API pricing, input and output tokens cost $0.28 per 1 million tokens and $0.42 per 1 million tokens, respectively.

Ideal For

It is better suited for debugging complicated legacy code and learning better coding practices. Plus, the model helps tackle algorithm challenges and LeetCode-style problems.

Downside

• Slower than non-thinking models due to the reasoning step

Try Deepseek V3.2 Thinking Now!

Deepseek V3.2 - Effective for Day-to-Day Programming Needs

Unlike the specialized “Thinking” version, Deepseek V3.2 is more of a generalist. This all-purpose coding problem is quite reliable for solving routine problems. It handles mundane programming tasks like writing functions, completing snippets, generating unit tests, refactoring existing code, and more.

Another major plus is that it does not overthink simple tasks like the Thinking variant. Consequently, it provides instant responses for tasks like writing boilerplate, explaining unfamiliar syntax, and CSS styling.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

The code and model weights for Deepseek V3.2 are free and open source (under the MIT license). API is not free but comparatively cheap, and costs around $0.28 per million tokens and $0.42 per million output tokens.

Ideal For

Deepseek V3.2 is fit for development teams and startups that need a fast, always-available coding assistant for daily programming tasks.

Downside

• Not as specialized as its “Thinking” sibling for debugging

Try Deepseek V3.2 Now!

Devstral 2 - Great for Software Engineering and Codebase Exploration

Devstral 2 (123B) from Mistral AI helps developers navigate large, messy codebases. This software engineering model operates at the codebase level rather than just individual snippets. It can navigate large repositories and assist with complicated software engineering tasks.

You can feed it entire files and get logical answers about how things fit together. Moreover, it answers questions about the architecture and explains the complex interdependencies.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

Devstral 2 is free and open source under Mistral’s open model license. Access through providers like Okara is cost-effective compared to proprietary alternatives.

Ideal For

It is perfect for full-time software engineers working on complex codebases. Plus, DevOps engineers writing complex CI/CD pipelines can benefit from this model.

Downside

• Too advanced for single-file or snippet-level tasks

Try Devstral 2 Now!

Devstral Small 2 - Best Lightweight Alternative for Smaller Repos

Devstral Small 2 (24B parameters) is for developers who do not need a giant, resource-intensive model. As the name implies, it offers many of the same code understanding capabilities as its bigger sibling, but in a smaller package.

The model runs comfortably and is best for everyday routine tasks. It delivers near-instantaneous responses for tasks such as implementing a new feature in a container module or understanding the file's logic.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

Devstral Small 2 is an affordable choice for software engineering tasks. More importantly, its smaller size means lower compute cost for both self-hosting and API usage.

Ideal For

It is ideal for solo developers and small teams working on small-to-mid-sized repositories.

Downside

• Not recommended for very large monorepos
• Shorter memory (context window) than the larger Devstral model

Try Devstral Small 2 Now!

Llama Maverick 4 - Best for Full-Stack Coding

Meta’s Llama Maverick 4 (17B active parameters, 128 MoE) is a versatile all-rounder. It is natively multi-model and supports image and text input with a 1-million-token context window. In addition, it understands the entire web ecosystem, including frontend frameworks, backend APIs, databases, and deployment. Llama Maverick 4 can build a complete feature with React frontend, Node.js backend, and PostgreSQL queries.

The model can handle frontend and backend code generation in the same session. Plus, processes images and diagrams as part of coding instructions.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

Llama Maverick 4 is free to download and self-host. Model weights are available under Meta’s Llama 4 community license, enabling commercial use.

Ideal For

It is fit for full-stack developers, web application projects, and learning modern frameworks.

Downside

• As a generalist, responses may be more verbose than coding-specific models

Try Llama Maverick 4 Now!

MiniMax M2.1 - Elite Performance for Coding and Agentic Tasks

MiniMax M2.1 is a sleeper hit among developers. It may sound lightweight by name, but it can handle complex agentic tasks. The model excels at long-running agent coding tasks that require it to act. This involves planning, calling external APIs, and synthesizing the results into a final solution.

MiniMax M2.1 is optimized for long-form output and following instructions. It can generate entire files and small modules in one go and does not forget instructions halfway through.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

M2.1 is accessible via the API at rates considerably below those of similar closed models. On the MiniMax official platform, API costs are $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens.

Ideal For

It is one of the strongest models for agentic workloads, multi-step coding tasks, and writing entire Feature modules.

Downside

• Limited community support compared to Llama or Mistral

Try MiniMax M2.1 Now!

Mistral Small - Efficient for Coding Reviews and Refactoring Needs

Mistral Small (24B parameters) is the model you call for a second opinion. Although labeled as Mistral AI’s “small” model, it is optimized for speed, function calling, and multi-model understanding. It excels in code reviews, spotting potential bugs, targeted refactoring, and enforcing style guides.

Mistral Small responds the fastest to fill-in-the-middle (FIM) tasks and focused requests.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

API usage costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.18 per million output tokens. It is about ten times cheaper than many premium alternatives.

Ideal For

Mistral Small is better suited for code-review automation, refactoring tasks, and teams seeking quick feedback.

Downside

• Less generative than larger models
• Not designed for solving complex architectural problems

Try Mistral Small Now!

GLM 4.7 - Best for Multi-Step Reasoning and Execution

GLM 4.7 is engineered for tasks that require deep, logical reasoning over multiple steps. It performs best when you need to follow complex logic, keep track of previous interactions, and execute a plan without getting lost. The model has a massive 128K output capacity, 30 billion parameters (3.6 billion active ones), and an MoE architecture.

Ziphu AI’s GLM 4.7 gives you an edge if you are working on algorithmic problems and automated code execution pipelines. It methodically works through the problem and gives correct solutions. On top of all, it rarely loses track of what you have instructed.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

As an open-weight model, self-hosting costs largely depend on the hardware. API costs are around $0.55–$0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens.

Ideal For

It is best for algorithmic coding, automated data pipelines, and agentic workflows.

Downside

• Sometimes fails to follow instructions

Try GLM 4.7 Now!

GPT-OSS 120B - Best for Enterprise-Grade Programming and Reasoning Needs

OpenAI’s GPT-OSS 120B is a massive model designed to compete with Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT-4. It handles enterprise-grade reasoning and programming tasks, such as working with SQL stored procedures, complex class hierarchies, and secure cryptographic functions.

Furthermore, its understanding of the enterprise-level patterns, security issues, and scalability concerns is unmatched in the open-source space.

Performance Benchmarks

Costing Elements

Since it is open-source, GPT-OSS can be self-hosted or accessed via Okara. Not to mention, the infrastructure costs of running a 120b model are quite high.

Ideal For

It is fit for large enterprises with complex codebases as well as projects with zero tolerance for error.

Downside

• Expensive GPU infrastructure
• High latency compared to MoE models

Try GPT-OSS 120 B Now!

How to Choose the Best Open-Source AI Models for Your Programming Needs?

Use these four criteria to pick the best open source AI coding models.

• Context Window: The context window determines how much code it can process at once. Mistral AI can handle small projects over 20K tokens. Pick Devstral 2 or MiniMax M2.1 for larger repos.
• Speed/Retry Rates: Low-latency models like Deepseek V3.2 or Mistral Small deliver fast responses for daily tasks. The retry rate is also an important factor. A model that needs multiple retries can waste time even if it is fast. Go for the slower “Thinking” variant of Deepseek V3.2 for deep debugging.
• Agent/Tool Use: Consider open-source models like Qwen 3 and MiniMax M2.1 if your workflow involves multi-step agent pipelines. GLM 4.7 leads on tool-use performance.
• Cost: Calculate your monthly token usage and compare it against API pricing. Teams with high usage should also consider the benefits of self-hosting. Devstral Small 2 is a budget-friendly option for local setups.

Quick Decision Guide

• If you need full-stack web apps, choose Llama Maverick 4.
• If you need to fix impossible bugs, try Deepseek V3.2 Thinking.
• If you need enterprise-grade production code, pick GPT-OSS 120B.
• If you are building AI agents, choose MiniMax M2.1.
• If you are learning a new code, choose Devstral 2.
• If you need a tool for fast, daily coding, opt for Deepseek V3.2 and Qwen 3.
• If you need max speed for coding tasks, choose Mistral Small or Devstral Small.
• If you need multi-step reasoning, pick GLM 4.7.

Are the Open-Source AI Coding LLM as Good as Closed Models?

Yes, and in many ways, open source models perform better. These models now directly compete with (and sometimes beat) closed alternatives like GPT-4, Gemini 1.5 Pro, and Claude 3.5 Sonnet. Models like Llama 4, Qwen 3, and Deepseek match closed models on coding-specific benchmarks like HumanEval and SWE-bench.

• Privacy and Data Control: The most common reason why open source models are becoming popular is privacy. Unlike closed models, you have full control over your data and code, and it never leaves your infrastructure. With closed models, there is no guarantee that the code submitted to the API server won't be stored or reused for training purposes.
• Cost Efficiency: Open source models save you a lot of money in the long run. Closed alternatives like Claude Sonnet and GPT-4o charge per token, so the costs add up the more you use them. In contrast, users only pay for the hosting or compute cost for self-hosted, open-source models. Teams running thousands of coding tasks daily can save massively using these closed alternatives.
• Customization: Although you can adjust settings and prompts, you can not truly change closed models. To make things work, proprietary APIs are not flexible and do not build around your internal codebase. On the other hand, open-source models can be customized to match your repositories and documentation.
• Transparency: Closed model users have no choice but to accept the company's pricing, usage, and rate limits. Also, engineering teams can not inspect and audit these systems. Open-source models are reliable and transparent because their code and weights are publicly available.

Get All These Models in One Place Without Compromising Privacy

Managing multiple models from various providers is not easy. Figuring out their different APIs, pricing structures, and interfaces will leave you exhausted.

Okara fixes this by providing a unified interface to access every model on this list. This privacy-first, cost-effective model is designed for developers who struggle to host 120B models themselves.

What Okara offers developers:

• One Interface: Switch between Deepseek V3.2, Qwen 3, Llama 4, and the rest without leaving the tab.
• Privacy-Focused: Rest assured that Okara does not train on your data. Data confidentiality is a non-negotiable for many teams, and Okara respects that. It collects and stores user data to improve future models.
• Cost-Effective: The platform gives you access to the best open-source AI models at a flat subscription fee. This means you won't pay per-token fees and can access all the aforementioned models with a single subscription.

FAQs

Which AI is best for coding if I need speed and low cost?
Deepseek V3.2 and Mistral Small are top picks for optimized speed and low cost. Both deliver instant responses without sacrificing code quality.

What’s the best model for large codebases or long context?
Devstral 2 is specifically designed for navigating large codebases. The purpose-built AI is good at understanding large repositories. GPT-OSS 120B also performs well on very large codebases.

Is it safe to paste the proprietary code into an AI model?
Your data might be used for training if you are using a consumer-grade, closed model. Alternatively, you can use a privacy-first platform like Okara, which explicitly does not train on user data. In addition, self-hosting an open source on your own infrastructure is the most secure option.

Do open-source AI models cost more than closed models?
Generally, no; open-source models are significantly cheaper than closed alternatives. You can successfully avoid per-token pricing and per-seat licensing fees. For open source AI, you will only cover the hardware cost. A better solution is to use Okara to access multiple AI models in a single subscription.

How to evaluate an open-source AI coding model before you choose one
Start by checking benchmark scores on HumanEval, LiveCodeBench, and SWE-bench. Then, try the LLM model yourself. On Okara, you can test these models side-by-side to see which one fits your coding style.