Model comparison
Celeris-1 vs Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Celeris-1; 5 to Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Celeris-1 only
- 1
- Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only
- 5
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Celeris-1 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking is the better fit if you need the larger 128K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Celeris-1 and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking is the reasoning model in the pair, while Celeris-1 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking gives you the larger context window at 128K, compared with 8K for Celeris-1.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Celeris-1$2 input / $6 output | Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Celeris-1Not available | Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Celeris-1Not available | Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Celeris-18K | Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking128K | Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Celeris-1 or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?
Celeris-1 and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Celeris-1 or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?
Celeris-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.9 versus 57.6. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.