Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Mellum2.1 Thinking

Overall
70
vs
Overall
9

Claude Haiku 5.5 is clearly better. It wins 106 of the 107 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. Mellum2.1 Thinking spends 2.1× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
7025.5s
3.9K, 78% thinking10.3K, 63% thinking
91m 56s
Agents
6139.5s
3.7K, 61% thinking10.8K, 93% thinking
92m 3s
Structured Extraction
9013.5s
2.6K, 83% thinking8.3K, 51% thinking
51m 36s
Coding
8630.6s
6.8K, 76% thinking11.3K, 38% thinking
52m 11s
Grounded Answers
7613.9s
2.2K, 78% thinking7.3K, 62% thinking
131m 24s
Instruction Following
9431.5s
4.3K, 82% thinking17.3K, 63% thinking
283m 10s
Business Logic
6726.0s
5.5K, 95% thinking9K, 50% thinking
01m 39s
Security & permissions
6723.4s
2.7K, 70% thinking9.1K, 75% thinking
81m 40s
Diagnosis & investigation
1725.5s
2.3K, 50% 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
225 tok/s
90 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Memory at 32K
—
12.9 GB
Context
1M (better)
128K
Cost per run
$0.42 (better)
$2.46 est.
Cost per case
$0.0028 (better)
$0.016 est.
Time per case
25.5s (better)
1m 56s
Quantization
—
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.

Claude Haiku 5.5Mellum2.1 Thinking
025507510050100150Perfect run709

Every test case

153 test cases

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

106 won by Claude Haiku 5.51 won by Mellum2.1 Thinking46 tied