Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs Underdog Saluki 27B

Overall
57
vs
Overall
33

Beam 1.0 501B A23B is clearly better. It wins 51 of the 70 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. Underdog Saluki 27B spends 1.7× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
5717.2s
4K, 87% thinking6.9K, 84% thinking
335m 15s
Agents
5521.8s
4.8K, 90% thinking11.8K, 97% thinking
409m 2s
Structured Extraction
819.98s
3.4K, 91% thinking4.4K, 92% thinking
433m 17s
Coding
4819.9s
4.5K, 70% thinking9.2K, 49% thinking
166m 54s
Grounded Answers
6911.6s
2.7K, 88% thinking4.5K, 92% thinking
433m 22s
Instruction Following
7820.9s
5.6K, 90% thinking8K, 94% thinking
466m 5s
Business Logic
5714.0s
4.2K, 95% thinking5.2K, 81% thinking
333m 55s
Security & permissions
5120.6s
3.2K, 88% thinking4.9K, 91% thinking
433m 47s
Diagnosis & investigation
1724.3s
3.1K, 90% thinking8.7K, 94% thinking
06m 39s

What you'd run

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

SpecAB
Speed
274 tok/s
23 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Memory at 32K
—
10.2 GB
Context
1M (better)
256K
Cost per run
$0.83
Not measured
Cost per case
$0.0054
Not measured
Time per case
17.2s (better)
5m 15s
Quantization
FP8
IQ2_XS
Harness
openrouter
llama.cpp

The race

1 lead change

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

Beam 1.0 501B A23BUnderdog Saluki 27B
025507510050100150Perfect run5733

Every test case

153 test cases

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

51 won by Beam 1.0 501B A23B19 won by Underdog Saluki 27B83 tied