Skip to main content

Model comparison

MAI-Thinking-1 vs Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
2 category wins0 category wins

Evidence parity. MAI-Thinking-1 and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to MAI-Thinking-1; 3 to Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
2
MAI-Thinking-1 only
11
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only
3
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. MAI-Thinking-1 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window; Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking is the better fit if its strengths line up with your actual workload.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

MAI-Thinking-1 and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

MAI-Thinking-1 gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking.

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 MAI-Thinking-1 and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
CategoryMAI-Thinking-1ΔMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
KnowledgeMAI-Thinking-172.5Margin 14.9Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking57.6
Inst. FollowingMAI-Thinking-185.0Margin 8.5Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking76.5
AgenticMAI-Thinking-146.0MarginNo overlapMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot measured
CodingMAI-Thinking-165.5MarginNo overlapMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot measured
MathMAI-Thinking-189.7MarginNo overlapMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · MAI-Thinking-1B · Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 84.2%B 57.6%
    Winner: MAI-Thinking-1Δ 26.6
    GPQA: MAI-Thinking-1 scored 84.2%; Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking scored 57.6%. MAI-Thinking-1 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricMAI-Thinking-1Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensMAI-Thinking-1Not availableMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondMAI-Thinking-1Not availableMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenMAI-Thinking-1Not availableMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensMAI-Thinking-1256KMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking128KMAI-Thinking-1 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 46%Not comparable
BFCL v4Source 45.6%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 52.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 46.0%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingResult
Graphwalks BFS 128KSource 90%Not comparable
KnowledgeMAI-Thinking-1 wins
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingResult
GPQASource 84.2%57.6%MAI-Thinking-1 leads
GPQA-DSource 84.2%57.6%MAI-Thinking-1 leads
MMLU-ProSource 85%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 31%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 86.2%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingResult
AIME 2025Source 97%Not comparable
AIME26Source 94.5%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 84.9%Not comparable
Inst. FollowingMAI-Thinking-1 wins
BenchmarkMAI-Thinking-1Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingResult
IFBenchSource 85%Not comparable
IFEvalSource 76.5%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, MAI-Thinking-1 or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

MAI-Thinking-1 and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, MAI-Thinking-1 or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 72.5 versus 57.6. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, MAI-Thinking-1 or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

MAI-Thinking-1 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 85 versus 76.5. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.