Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-4o Audio vs Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Updated August 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

GPT-4o Audio

OpenAI

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

JetBrains

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.

0 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. GPT-4o Audio does not fit this workload in one request. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking does not fit this workload in one request. GPT-4o Audio has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
0
GPT-4o Audio only
0
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only
6
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Agentic

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
57.6
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
GPT-4o Audio
Not measured
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
76.5
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

GPT-4o Audio
$0.0075
Fits in one request
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o Audio
$0.155
Fits in one request
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o Audio
$0.65
Does not fit in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
API rate not published
Does not fit in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

GPT-4o Audio does not fit this workload in one request. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking does not fit this workload in one request. GPT-4o Audio has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

128K

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

GPT-4o Audio

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

GPT-4o Audio

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Not sourced

Documented outputs

GPT-4o Audio

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Not sourced

Provider availability

GPT-4o Audio

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-4o Audio

Non-Reasoning

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Reasoning

Weight access

GPT-4o Audio

Proprietary

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Open Weight

License

GPT-4o Audio

Proprietary

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Open Weight

Release date

GPT-4o Audio

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

2026-05-28

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 128K.

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence6 rows

Agentic

  • BFCL v4

    GPT-4o Audio
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking45.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    GPT-4o Audio
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking69.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • MMLU-Redux

    GPT-4o Audio
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking86.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA

    GPT-4o Audio
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking57.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    GPT-4o Audio
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking57.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    GPT-4o Audio
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking76.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, GPT-4o Audio or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, GPT-4o Audio or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-4o Audio or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, GPT-4o Audio or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-4o Audio or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

Both models list the same context window, 128K.

Related comparisons

Last updated August 4, 2026

Watch GPT-4o Audio vs Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.