LFM2.5 24B A2B vs Spark X2.6 4B
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 1.2× as many thinking tokens per test case.
TaskALFM2.5 24B A2BBSpark X2.6 4B
Overall
71m 53s
151m 3s
Agents
123m 49s
141m 32s
Structured Extraction
1054.9s
1039.5s
Coding
11m 15s
41m 8s
Grounded Answers
557.8s
1050.2s
Instruction Following
162m 44s
371m 29s
Business Logic
51m 2s
1036.3s
Security & permissions
101m 52s
3154.3s
Diagnosis & investigation
04m 12s
01m 30s
What you'd run
The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.
SpecALFM2.5 24B A2BBSpark X2.6 4B
Speed
82 tok/s
136 tok/s
Machine
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
RTX 5090, 32 GB
Memory at 32K
25.0 GB
9.4 GB (better)
Context
128K
605K (better)
Cost per run
Not measured
$1.61 est.
Cost per case
Not measured
$0.011 est.
Time per case
1m 53s
1m 3s (better)
Quantization
Q8_0
BF16
Harness
llama.cpp
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