Model comparison
Laguna M.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
BenchAlign evidence: Laguna M.1 not scored; Step 3.7 Flash estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Laguna M.1 and Step 3.7 Flash share 3 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Laguna M.1; 27 to Step 3.7 Flash.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- Laguna M.1 only
- 2
- Step 3.7 Flash only
- 27
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Step 3.7 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Laguna M.1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Step 3.7 Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 57 to 53. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Step 3.7 Flash's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 66.4 against 45.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 45.8% to 59.5%. Laguna M.1 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
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 | Laguna M.1 | Δ | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Laguna M.145.8 | Margin→ 20.6 | Step 3.7 Flash66.4 |
| Coding | Laguna M.164.8 | Margin← 8.5 | Step 3.7 Flash56.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 45.8%B 59.5%Winner: Step 3.7 FlashΔ 13.7Terminal-Bench 2.0: Laguna M.1 scored 45.8%; Step 3.7 Flash scored 59.5%. Step 3.7 Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 49.2%B 56.3%Winner: Step 3.7 FlashΔ 7.1SWE-bench Pro: Laguna M.1 scored 49.2%; Step 3.7 Flash scored 56.3%. Step 3.7 Flash wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Laguna M.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Laguna M.1Not available | Step 3.7 Flash$0.2 input / $1.15 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Laguna M.1Not available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Laguna M.1Not available | Step 3.7 FlashNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Laguna M.1256K | Step 3.7 Flash256K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticStep 3.7 Flash wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna M.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 45.8% | 59.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 92.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 25.9% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 49.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 51.57% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 21.5% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 98.5% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1017 | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 14.8% | Not comparable |
CodingLaguna M.1 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna M.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 74.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 63.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 49.2% | 56.3% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 45.8% | 59.5% | Step 3.7 Flash leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 39.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 35.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 40.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna M.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 30.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 80.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 19.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -37.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 25.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 84.4% | Not comparable |
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Laguna M.1 | Step 3.7 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 67.3% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Laguna M.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 57 to 53. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 45.8% and 59.5%.
Which is better for coding, Laguna M.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Laguna M.1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.8 versus 56.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Laguna M.1 or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.4 versus 45.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.