DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM2.5 24B A2B
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. LFM2.5 24B A2B spends 1.6× as many thinking tokens per test case.
TaskADeepSeek V4.1 FlashBLFM2.5 24B A2B
Overall
643m 35s
71m 53s
Agents
464m 42s
123m 49s
Structured Extraction
862m 8s
1054.9s
Coding
514m 55s
11m 15s
Grounded Answers
762m 17s
557.8s
Instruction Following
894m 24s
162m 44s
Business Logic
814m 1s
51m 2s
Security & permissions
693m 3s
101m 52s
Diagnosis & investigation
172m 8s
04m 12s
What you'd run
The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.
SpecADeepSeek V4.1 FlashBLFM2.5 24B A2B
Speed
30 tok/s
82 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Memory at 32K
—
25.0 GB
Context
1M (better)
128K
Cost per run
$0.39
Not measured
Cost per case
$0.0026
Not measured
Time per case
3m 35s
1m 53s (better)
Quantization
FP8
Q8_0
Harness
openrouter
llama.cpp
The race
Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.
Every test case
Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.
Agents
Structured Extraction
Coding
Grounded Answers
Instruction Following
Business Logic
Security & permissions
Diagnosis & investigation