Apodex 1.1 Mini (free) vs Mellum2.1 Thinking

Overall
25
vs
Overall
9

Apodex 1.1 Mini (free) is clearly better. It wins 37 of the 44 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. Both models spend about the same on thinking per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
2535.1s
8.5K, 75% thinking10.3K, 63% thinking
91m 56s
Agents
2639.4s
6.2K, 69% thinking10.8K, 93% thinking
92m 3s
Structured Extraction
5227.2s
7.7K, 68% thinking8.3K, 51% thinking
51m 36s
Coding
446.5s
12.1K, 94% thinking11.3K, 38% thinking
52m 11s
Grounded Answers
2926.0s
6.9K, 70% thinking7.3K, 62% thinking
131m 24s
Instruction Following
3644.5s
11.4K, 79% thinking17.3K, 63% thinking
283m 10s
Business Logic
1435.4s
10K, 56% thinking9K, 50% thinking
01m 39s
Security & permissions
4027.3s
5.8K, 76% thinking9.1K, 75% thinking
81m 40s
Diagnosis & investigation
034.6s
5.1K, 84% thinking6.8K, 98% thinking
01m 15s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
278 tok/s
90 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Memory at 32K
—
12.9 GB
Context
256K (better)
128K
Cost per run
Not measured
$2.46 est.
Cost per case
Not measured
$0.016 est.
Time per case
35.1s (better)
1m 56s
Quantization
BF16
Q8_0
Harness
openrouter
llama.cpp

The race

No lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Apodex 1.1 Mini (free)Mellum2.1 Thinking
025507510050100150Perfect run259

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

37 won by Apodex 1.1 Mini (free)7 won by Mellum2.1 Thinking109 tied