Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

LFM2.5-8B-A1B vs ZAYA1-8B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 4 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

41.25/100
Margin
13.8pts
winning →
ZAYA1-8B
Zyphra
55/100
1 category wins1 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: LFM2.5-8B-A1B estimated; ZAYA1-8B not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. LFM2.5-8B-A1B and ZAYA1-8B share 4 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to LFM2.5-8B-A1B; 7 to ZAYA1-8B.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
4
LFM2.5-8B-A1B only
14
ZAYA1-8B only
7
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick ZAYA1-8B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. LFM2.5-8B-A1B only becomes the better choice if instruction following is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 4 shared benchmark results across 3 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

ZAYA1-8B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 55 to 37. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

ZAYA1-8B's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 80.4 against 50. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is AIME26, 50.0% to 89.1%. LFM2.5-8B-A1B does hit back in instruction following, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

ZAYA1-8B gives you the larger context window at 131K, 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 scores and score margins for LFM2.5-8B-A1B and ZAYA1-8B
CategoryLFM2.5-8B-A1BΔZAYA1-8B
MathLFM2.5-8B-A1B50.0Margin→ 30.4ZAYA1-8B80.4
Inst. FollowingLFM2.5-8B-A1B68.8Margin← 4.7ZAYA1-8B64.1
KnowledgeLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measuredMarginNo overlapZAYA1-8B73.6

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · LFM2.5-8B-A1BB · ZAYA1-8B

  1. AIME26

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 50.0%B 89.1%
    Winner: ZAYA1-8BΔ 39.1
    AIME26: LFM2.5-8B-A1B scored 50.0%; ZAYA1-8B scored 89.1%. ZAYA1-8B wins this benchmark.

  2. IFEval

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 91.8%B 85.6%
    Winner: LFM2.5-8B-A1BΔ 6.3
    IFEval: LFM2.5-8B-A1B scored 91.8%; ZAYA1-8B scored 85.6%. LFM2.5-8B-A1B wins this benchmark.

  3. IFBench

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 56.5%B 52.6%
    Winner: LFM2.5-8B-A1BΔ 3.9
    IFBench: LFM2.5-8B-A1B scored 56.5%; ZAYA1-8B scored 52.6%. LFM2.5-8B-A1B wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricLFM2.5-8B-A1BZAYA1-8BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensLFM2.5-8B-A1B$0 input / $0 outputZAYA1-8B$0 input / $0 outputListed prices are equal.
Generation speedtokens per secondLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot availableZAYA1-8BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenLFM2.5-8B-A1BNot availableZAYA1-8BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensLFM2.5-8B-A1B128KZAYA1-8B131KZAYA1-8B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkLFM2.5-8B-A1BZAYA1-8BResult
BFCL v4Source 49.7%39.2%LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 16.1%—Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkLFM2.5-8B-A1BZAYA1-8BResult
Terminal-Bench HardSource 4.5%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 7.8%—Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source —65.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkLFM2.5-8B-A1BZAYA1-8BResult
AA-LCRSource 0.0%—Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%—Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkLFM2.5-8B-A1BZAYA1-8BResult
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 51.3%—Not comparable
AA-HLESource 6.9%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -33.3%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 9.4%—Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 47.0%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 8.3%—Not comparable
GPQASource —71%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource —71.0%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —74.2%Not comparable
MathZAYA1-8B wins
BenchmarkLFM2.5-8B-A1BZAYA1-8BResult
MATH-500Source 88.8%—Not comparable
AIME 2025Source 42.5%—Not comparable
AIME26Source 50.0%89.1%ZAYA1-8B leads
HMMT Feb 2026Source —71.6%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource —59.3%Not comparable
ApexSource —32.2%Not comparable
Inst. FollowingLFM2.5-8B-A1B wins
BenchmarkLFM2.5-8B-A1BZAYA1-8BResult
IFEvalSource 91.8%85.6%LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads
IFBenchSource 56.5%52.6%LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads
AA-IFBenchSource 55.6%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, LFM2.5-8B-A1B or ZAYA1-8B?

ZAYA1-8B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 55 to 37. The biggest single separator in this matchup is AIME26, where the scores are 50.0% and 89.1%.

Which is better for math, LFM2.5-8B-A1B or ZAYA1-8B?

ZAYA1-8B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 50. Inside this category, AIME26 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, LFM2.5-8B-A1B or ZAYA1-8B?

LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 68.8 versus 64.1. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

LiquidAI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
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.