Model comparison
Grok 4 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: Grok 4 supported; LFM2.5-8B-A1B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Grok 4 and LFM2.5-8B-A1B share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to Grok 4; 6 to LFM2.5-8B-A1B.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Grok 4 only
- 5
- LFM2.5-8B-A1B only
- 6
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Grok 4 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 stronger reasoning-first profile.
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
Grok 4 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 61 to 37. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
LFM2.5-8B-A1B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok 4 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.
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 | Grok 4 | Δ | LFM2.5-8B-A1B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Grok 415.3 | Margin→ 34.7 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B50.0 |
| Inst. Following | Grok 4Not 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 | Grok 4 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Grok 4Not available | LFM2.5-8B-A1B$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Grok 454 tok/s | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Grok 415.60 s | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Grok 4128K | LFM2.5-8B-A1B128K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic3 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 33.3% | 8.3% | Grok 4 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.7% | 51.3% | Grok 4 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 23.9% | 6.9% | Grok 4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 3.8% | -33.3% | Grok 4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 41.4% | 9.4% | Grok 4 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 64.2% | 47.0% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
MathLFM2.5-8B-A1B wins5 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Grok 4 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 68.8% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Grok 4 or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
Grok 4 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 61 to 37.
Which is better for math, Grok 4 or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 50 versus 15.3. Grok 4 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.