Skip to main content

Model comparison

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking vs o1

Data verified

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

No comparison
OpenAI
48.1/100
0 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking unranked (Not scored); o1 #129 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking and o1 share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking; 14 to o1.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
2
Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking only
3
o1 only
14
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking makes more sense if its workflow fits your team better; o1 is the better fit if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 200K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 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

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking and o1 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.

o1 gives you the larger context window at 200K, 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 Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking and o1
CategoryMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingΔo1
KnowledgeMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking57.6Margin 18.1o175.7
Inst. FollowingMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking76.5Margin 15.7o192.2
MathMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot measuredMarginNo overlapo19.3

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingB · o1
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 57.6%B 75.7%
    Winner: o1Δ 18.1
    GPQA: Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking scored 57.6%; o1 scored 75.7%. o1 wins this benchmark.
  2. IFEval

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 76.5%B 92.2%
    Winner: o1Δ 15.7
    IFEval: Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking scored 76.5%; o1 scored 92.2%. o1 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinkingo1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot availableo1$15 input / $60 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot availableo198 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenMellum2-12B-A2.5B-ThinkingNot availableo132.29 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking128Ko1200Ko1 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinkingo1Result
BFCL v4Source 45.6%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 62.6%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinkingo1Result
AA Coding IndexSource 39.7%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 35.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinkingo1Result
AA-LCRSource 59.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.3%Not comparable
Knowledgeo1 wins
BenchmarkMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinkingo1Result
MMLU-ReduxSource 86.2%Not comparable
GPQASource 57.6%75.7%o1 leads
GPQA-DSource 57.6%Not comparable
MMLUSource 91.8%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 23.4%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 74.7%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 7.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -10.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 34.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 69.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinkingo1Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 9.310%Not comparable
Inst. Followingo1 wins
BenchmarkMellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinkingo1Result
IFEvalSource 76.5%92.2%o1 leads
AA-IFBenchSource 70.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking or o1?

Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking and o1 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, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking or o1?

o1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.7 versus 57.6. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Mellum2-12B-A2.5B-Thinking or o1?

o1 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 92.2 versus 76.5. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

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.