Model comparison
GPT-5.4 mini vs LFM2.5-8B-A1B
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
BenchAlign evidence: GPT-5.4 mini estimated; LFM2.5-8B-A1B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 mini and LFM2.5-8B-A1B share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to GPT-5.4 mini; 6 to LFM2.5-8B-A1B.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- GPT-5.4 mini only
- 19
- LFM2.5-8B-A1B only
- 6
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. LFM2.5-8B-A1B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 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
GPT-5.4 mini is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 64 to 37. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4 mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.75 input / $4.50 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. GPT-5.4 mini gives you the larger context window at 400K, 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 | GPT-5.4 mini | Δ | LFM2.5-8B-A1B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-5.4 mini21.7 | Margin→ 28.3 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B50.0 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.4 mini65.7 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.4 mini47.8 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.4 mini76.6 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
| Inst. Following | GPT-5.4 miniNot 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 | GPT-5.4 mini | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.4 mini$0.75 input / $4.5 output | LFM2.5-8B-A1B$0 input / $0 output | LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.4 mini201 tok/s | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.4 mini3.85 s | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.4 mini400K | LFM2.5-8B-A1B128K | GPT-5.4 mini lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 60% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 72.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 57.7% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 42.9% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 83.3% | 16.1% | GPT-5.4 mini leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 30.2% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 33.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1171 | — | Not comparable |
| BFCL v4Source | — | 49.7% | Not comparable |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 mini | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 88% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 41.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.0% | 8.3% | GPT-5.4 mini leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.5% | 51.3% | GPT-5.4 mini leads |
| AA-HLESource | 26.6% | 6.9% | GPT-5.4 mini leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -18.7% | -33.3% | GPT-5.4 mini leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.5% | 9.4% | GPT-5.4 mini leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 89.8% | 47.0% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
MathLFM2.5-8B-A1B wins5 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-5.4 mini or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
GPT-5.4 mini is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 64 to 37.
Which is better for math, GPT-5.4 mini or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 50 versus 21.7. GPT-5.4 mini 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.