Mellum2.1 Thinking vs Underdog Saluki 27B

Overall
9
vs
Overall
33

Underdog Saluki 27B is clearly better. It wins 53 of the 56 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. Both models spend about the same on thinking per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
91m 56s
10.3K, 63% thinking6.9K, 84% thinking
335m 15s
Agents
92m 3s
10.8K, 93% thinking11.8K, 97% thinking
409m 2s
Structured Extraction
51m 36s
8.3K, 51% thinking4.4K, 92% thinking
433m 17s
Coding
52m 11s
11.3K, 38% thinking9.2K, 49% thinking
166m 54s
Grounded Answers
131m 24s
7.3K, 62% thinking4.5K, 92% thinking
433m 22s
Instruction Following
283m 10s
17.3K, 63% thinking8K, 94% thinking
466m 5s
Business Logic
01m 39s
9K, 50% thinking5.2K, 81% thinking
333m 55s
Security & permissions
81m 40s
9.1K, 75% thinking4.9K, 91% thinking
433m 47s
Diagnosis & investigation
01m 15s
6.8K, 98% thinking8.7K, 94% thinking
06m 39s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
90 tok/s (better)
23 tok/s
Machine
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Memory at 32K
12.9 GB
10.2 GB (better)
Context
128K
256K (better)
Cost per run
$2.46 est.
Not measured
Cost per case
$0.016 est.
Not measured
Time per case
1m 56s (better)
5m 15s
Quantization
Q8_0
IQ2_XS
Harness
llama.cpp
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.

Mellum2.1 ThinkingUnderdog Saluki 27B
025507510050100150Perfect run933

Every test case

153 test cases

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

3 won by Mellum2.1 Thinking53 won by Underdog Saluki 27B97 tied