Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

See the free Radar Brief
JetBrains logo
Model A
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

JetBrains

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct vs Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload. This is a same-family comparison, so migration details appear when the source data supports them.

JetBrains logo
Model B
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

JetBrains

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.

6 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking are not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct does not fit this workload in one request. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking does not fit this workload in one request. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct has no comparable published API token rate. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
6
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct only
0
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only
0
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Directional only
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
47.8
Estimated · #82/151
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
48.3
Estimated · #76/151
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 1 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
48.1
Estimated · #103/181
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
48.8
Estimated · #96/181
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 3 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Not comparable
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
Not ranked
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 1 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
Not ranked
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
Not ranked
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
Not ranked
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
Not ranked
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
Not ranked
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct has no comparable published API token rate. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct has no comparable published API token rate. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
API rate not published
Does not fit in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking
API rate not published
Does not fit in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct does not fit this workload in one request. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking does not fit this workload in one request. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct has no comparable published API token rate. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

128K

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

128K

API model ID

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

No comparable hosted API rate

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Not sourced

Provider availability

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

Not sourced

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

Non-Reasoning

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Reasoning

Weight access

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

Open Weight

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Open Weight

License

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

Open Weight

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

Open Weight

Release date

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct

2026-05-28

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

2026-05-28

If you are choosing between sibling variants
Deployment change
Both entries list JetBrains as the provider. Confirm endpoint, model ID, limits, and feature support before switching.
Quality signal
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 128K.

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence6 rows

Agentic

  • BFCL v4

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct44.2%
    Source
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking45.6%
    Source

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking leads this result

Coding

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct37.2%
    Source
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking69.9%
    Source

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking leads this result

Knowledge

  • MMLU-Redux

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct78.1%
    Source
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking86.2%
    Source

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking leads this result

  • GPQA

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct40.9%
    Source
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking57.6%
    Source

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct40.9%
    Source
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking57.6%
    Source

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking leads this result

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct75.8%
    Source
    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking76.5%
    Source

    Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking leads this result

Frequently asked questions

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

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking are not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 48.3 to 47.8. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct and Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct or Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking?

Both models list the same context window, 128K.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 4, 2026

Watch Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct vs Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.