LFM2.5 24B A2B vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
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.
TaskALFM2.5 24B A2BBMiMo-V2.6-Pro
Overall
71m 53s
482m 13s
Agents
123m 49s
474m 48s
Structured Extraction
1054.9s
601m 26s
Coding
11m 15s
242m 58s
Grounded Answers
557.8s
621m 9s
Instruction Following
162m 44s
591m 23s
Business Logic
51m 2s
571m 52s
Security & permissions
101m 52s
711m 41s
Diagnosis & investigation
04m 12s
02m 54s
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-Pro
Speed
82 tok/s
55 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
$1.80
Cost per case
Not measured
$0.012
Time per case
1m 53s (better)
2m 13s
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