Apodex 1.1 Mini (free) vs Spark X2.6 4B

Overall
25
vs
Overall
15

Apodex 1.1 Mini (free) is clearly better. It wins 31 of the 42 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% thinking8.2K, 84% thinking
151m 3s
Agents
2639.4s
6.2K, 69% thinking11.5K, 97% thinking
141m 32s
Structured Extraction
5227.2s
7.7K, 68% thinking5.3K, 78% thinking
1039.5s
Coding
446.5s
12.1K, 94% thinking9.1K, 48% thinking
41m 8s
Grounded Answers
2926.0s
6.9K, 70% thinking6.6K, 86% thinking
1050.2s
Instruction Following
3644.5s
11.4K, 79% thinking11.9K, 90% thinking
371m 29s
Business Logic
1435.4s
10K, 56% thinking4.9K, 86% thinking
1036.3s
Security & permissions
4027.3s
5.8K, 76% thinking7K, 94% thinking
3154.3s
Diagnosis & investigation
034.6s
5.1K, 84% thinking11.6K, 98% thinking
01m 30s

What you'd run

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

SpecAB
Speed
278 tok/s
136 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
RTX 5090, 32 GB
Memory at 32K
—
9.4 GB
Context
256K
605K (better)
Cost per run
Not measured
$1.61 est.
Cost per case
Not measured
$0.011 est.
Time per case
35.1s (better)
1m 3s
Quantization
BF16
BF16
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)Spark X2.6 4B
0255075100501001502515

Every test case

153 test cases

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

31 won by Apodex 1.1 Mini (free)11 won by Spark X2.6 4B111 tied