LFM2.5 24B A2B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
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 2.2× as many thinking tokens per test case.
TaskALFM2.5 24B A2BBMiMo-V2.6-Flash
Overall
71m 53s
451m 21s
Agents
123m 49s
381m 19s
Structured Extraction
1054.9s
6238.0s
Coding
11m 15s
242m 40s
Grounded Answers
557.8s
6242.1s
Instruction Following
162m 44s
641m 2s
Business Logic
51m 2s
4356.4s
Security & permissions
101m 52s
662m 6s
Diagnosis & investigation
04m 12s
01m 33s
What you'd run
The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.
SpecALFM2.5 24B A2BBMiMo-V2.6-Flash
Speed
82 tok/s
66 tok/s
Machine
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Hosted
Memory at 32K
25.0 GB
—
Context
128K
1.1M (better)
Cost per run
Not measured
$0.33
Cost per case
Not measured
$0.0021
Time per case
1m 53s
1m 21s (better)
Quantization
Q8_0
BF16
Harness
llama.cpp
openrouter
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