Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
27
Qwen3.5 397B
63
Verified leaderboard positions: Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct unranked · Qwen3.5 397B #20
Pick Qwen3.5 397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Coding
+23.1 difference
Knowledge
+24.3 difference
Inst. Following
+16.8 difference
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct
Qwen3.5 397B
N/A
$0.6 / $3.6
N/A
96 t/s
N/A
2.44s
128K
128K
Pick Qwen3.5 397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Qwen3.5 397B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 63 to 27. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5 397B's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 65.2 against 40.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 40.9% to 88.4%.
Qwen3.5 397B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 63 to 27. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 40.9% and 88.4%.
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.2 versus 40.9. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.3 versus 37.2. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Instruct stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Qwen3.5 397B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 92.6 versus 75.8. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.