Spark X2.6 1.7B vs Claude Haiku 5.5

Overall
4
vs
Overall
70

Claude Haiku 5.5 is clearly better. It wins 113 of the 114 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. The time under each score is the average per test case, on the machine it ran on. Spark X2.6 1.7B spends 2.4× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
41m 43s
10.8K, 68% thinking3.9K, 78% thinking
7025.5s
Agents
02m 10s
13.6K, 95% thinking3.7K, 61% thinking
6139.5s
Structured Extraction
01m 19s
7.3K, 57% thinking2.6K, 83% thinking
9013.5s
Coding
01m 51s
11.6K, 37% thinking6.8K, 76% thinking
8630.6s
Grounded Answers
056.4s
6.1K, 66% thinking2.2K, 78% thinking
7613.9s
Instruction Following
242m 53s
18.7K, 72% thinking4.3K, 82% thinking
9431.5s
Business Logic
01m 22s
8.9K, 49% thinking5.5K, 95% thinking
6726.0s
Security & permissions
1059.4s
6.5K, 70% thinking2.7K, 70% thinking
6723.4s
Diagnosis & investigation
03m 16s
21.5K, 96% thinking2.3K, 50% thinking
1725.5s

What you'd run

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

SpecAB
Speed
106 tok/s
225 tok/s
Machine
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Hosted
Memory at 32K
2.9 GB
—
Context
1M
1M
Cost per run
Not measured
$0.42
Cost per case
Not measured
$0.0028
Time per case
1m 43s
25.5s (better)
Quantization
Q8_0
—
Harness
llama.cpp
openrouter

The race

No lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Spark X2.6 1.7BClaude Haiku 5.5
025507510050100150470

Every test case

153 test cases

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

1 won by Spark X2.6 1.7B113 won by Claude Haiku 5.539 tied