Model comparison
LFM2.5-8B-A1B vs Llama 4 Maverick
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: LFM2.5-8B-A1B estimated; Llama 4 Maverick supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. LFM2.5-8B-A1B and Llama 4 Maverick share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to LFM2.5-8B-A1B; 7 to Llama 4 Maverick.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- LFM2.5-8B-A1B only
- 6
- Llama 4 Maverick only
- 7
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick LFM2.5-8B-A1B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Llama 4 Maverick only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
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
LFM2.5-8B-A1B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 37 to 18. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
LFM2.5-8B-A1B's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 50 against 0.7.
LFM2.5-8B-A1B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Llama 4 Maverick 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. Llama 4 Maverick gives you the larger context window at 1M, 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 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Δ | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | LFM2.5-8B-A1B50.0 | Margin← 49.3 | Llama 4 Maverick0.7 |
| Inst. Following | LFM2.5-8B-A1B68.8 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 MaverickNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Llama 4 Maverick | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | LFM2.5-8B-A1B$0 input / $0 output | Llama 4 Maverick$0 input / $0 output | Listed prices are equal. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | Llama 4 Maverick121 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | Llama 4 Maverick0.95 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | LFM2.5-8B-A1B128K | Llama 4 Maverick1M | Llama 4 Maverick lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 51.3% | 67.1% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
| AA-HLESource | 6.9% | 4.8% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -33.3% | -41.8% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 9.4% | 24.3% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 47.0% | 87.3% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 8.3% | 14.3% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
MathLFM2.5-8B-A1B wins4 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, LFM2.5-8B-A1B or Llama 4 Maverick?
LFM2.5-8B-A1B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 37 to 18.
Which is better for math, LFM2.5-8B-A1B or Llama 4 Maverick?
LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 50 versus 0.7. Llama 4 Maverick stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
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.