Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs LFM2.5-8B-A1B
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) unranked (Not scored); LFM2.5-8B-A1B #166 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and LFM2.5-8B-A1B share 11 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 34 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max); 6 to LFM2.5-8B-A1B.
Updated July 17, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) only
- 34
- LFM2.5-8B-A1B only
- 6
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) makes more sense if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window; LFM2.5-8B-A1B is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 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
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and LFM2.5-8B-A1B 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.
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for LFM2.5-8B-A1B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for LFM2.5-8B-A1B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Δ | LFM2.5-8B-A1B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)94.8 | Margin← 44.8 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B50.0 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)63.8 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)68.8 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)55.3 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1B68.8 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | LFM2.5-8B-A1B$0 input / $0 output | LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)1M | LFM2.5-8B-A1B128K | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 73.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 45.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 69% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1189 | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 47.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 31.1% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95% | 16.1% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 34.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 831 | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 39.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 1.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 31.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 22.9% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 35.6% | — | Not comparable |
| BFCL v4Source | — | 49.7% | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 3052.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 79% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 73.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 56.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 44.9% | 7.8% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 86.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 34.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 78.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 88.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 88.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 34.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.3% | 8.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 89.4% | 51.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 32.1% | 6.9% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -22.9% | -33.3% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.2% | 9.4% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 95.8% | 47.0% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 50.0% | — | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 94.8% | — | Not comparable |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | 88.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | 33.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | 85.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MATH-500Source | — | 88.8% | Not comparable |
| AIME 2025Source | — | 42.5% | Not comparable |
| AIME26Source | — | 50.0% | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1240 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and LFM2.5-8B-A1B 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 math, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 94.8 versus 50. LFM2.5-8B-A1B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.