Skip to main content

Model comparison

Laguna XS.2 vs Step 3.7 Flash

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Poolside
46/100
Margin
4.8pts
winning →
50.76/100
1 category wins1 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: Laguna XS.2 not scored; Step 3.7 Flash estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Laguna XS.2 and Step 3.7 Flash share 3 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Laguna XS.2; 27 to Step 3.7 Flash.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
3
Laguna XS.2 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 XS.2 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

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 46. 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 35.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 35.7% to 59.5%. Laguna XS.2 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Step 3.7 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.20 input / $1.15 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Laguna XS.2. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone.

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 scores and score margins for Laguna XS.2 and Step 3.7 Flash
CategoryLaguna XS.2ΔStep 3.7 Flash
AgenticLaguna XS.235.7Margin 30.7Step 3.7 Flash66.4
CodingLaguna XS.260.8Margin 4.5Step 3.7 Flash56.3

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Laguna XS.2B · Step 3.7 Flash
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 35.7%B 59.5%
    Winner: Step 3.7 FlashΔ 23.8
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Laguna XS.2 scored 35.7%; Step 3.7 Flash scored 59.5%. Step 3.7 Flash wins this benchmark.
  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 46.3%B 56.3%
    Winner: Step 3.7 FlashΔ 10
    SWE-bench Pro: Laguna XS.2 scored 46.3%; 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.

MetricLaguna XS.2Step 3.7 FlashComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensLaguna XS.2$0 input / $0 outputStep 3.7 Flash$0.2 input / $1.15 outputLaguna XS.2 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondLaguna XS.2Not availableStep 3.7 FlashNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenLaguna XS.2Not availableStep 3.7 FlashNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensLaguna XS.2256KStep 3.7 Flash256KListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticStep 3.7 Flash wins
BenchmarkLaguna XS.2Step 3.7 FlashResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 35.7%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 1017Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 14.8%Not comparable
CodingLaguna XS.2 wins
BenchmarkLaguna XS.2Step 3.7 FlashResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 69.9%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 57.7%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 46.3%56.3%Step 3.7 Flash leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 35.7%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
Reasoning
BenchmarkLaguna XS.2Step 3.7 FlashResult
AA-LCRSource 63.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 2.3%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkLaguna XS.2Step 3.7 FlashResult
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
Multimodal
BenchmarkLaguna XS.2Step 3.7 FlashResult
SimpleVQASource 79.2%Not comparable
V*Source 95.3%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.3%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1218Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkLaguna XS.2Step 3.7 FlashResult
AA-IFBenchSource 67.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Laguna XS.2 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 57 to 46. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 35.7% and 59.5%.

Which is better for coding, Laguna XS.2 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Laguna XS.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.8 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 XS.2 or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 66.4 versus 35.7. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 16, 2026

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.