Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Laguna XS.2
63
Ornith-1.0-9B
52
Pick Laguna XS.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-9B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+13.0 difference
Coding
+16.1 difference
Laguna XS.2
Ornith-1.0-9B
$0.1 / $0.2
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
256K
262K
Pick Laguna XS.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-9B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Laguna XS.2 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 63 to 52. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Laguna XS.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.10 input / $0.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Ornith-1.0-9B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Ornith-1.0-9B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for Laguna XS.2.
Laguna XS.2 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 63 to 52. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 30.1% and 43.1%.
Ornith-1.0-9B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 69.4 versus 53.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Ornith-1.0-9B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 43.1 versus 30.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.