Skip to main content
Radar

Every change to the models you run, with its source and its date. Releases, price changes, retirements, API changes, and incidents.Every change to the models you run, with its source.

Follow model changes

Mini-Omni2 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Decision reading

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.

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

Model A
Mini-Omni2

gpt-omni

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Prism ML logo
Model B
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Prism ML

50.78/100

Estimated · Public rank #122

90% interval 40.960.6

Updated September 18, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

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

    Mini-Omni2 is 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

    Mini-Omni2 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete context comparison is not sourced.

    Confidence: limited

  • 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

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

    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
0
Mini-Omni2 only
0
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B only
21
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

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

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
49.9
Estimated · #59/154
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
49.9
Estimated · #64/154
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
73.9
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
50.6
Estimated · #78/184
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
76.8
Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Mini-Omni2
Not ranked
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
71.0
#64/124
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 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.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

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

Mini-Omni2
API rate not published
Fit state unavailable
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Mini-Omni2 has no comparable published API token rate. Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Mini-Omni2
API rate not published
Fit state unavailable
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Mini-Omni2 has no comparable published API token rate. Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

Mini-Omni2
API rate not published
Fit state unavailable
Cached-input rate unavailable
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Mini-Omni2 has no comparable published API token rate. Ternary Bonsai 2 27B 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.

Mini-Omni2

N/A

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Documented inputs

Mini-Omni2

Not sourced

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Mini-Omni2

Not sourced

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Not sourced

Provider availability

Mini-Omni2

Not sourced

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Mini-Omni2

Non-Reasoning

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Reasoning

Weight access

Mini-Omni2

Open Weight

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Open Weight

License

Mini-Omni2

Open Weight

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Open Weight

Release date

Mini-Omni2

2024-10-15

Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

2026-09-17

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
A complete documented context comparison is not available.

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 evidence21 rows

Agentic

  • τ²-bench results

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B80.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BFCL v3

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B74.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B52.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B90.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BigCodeBench

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B58.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B60.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B52.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • MMLU-Redux

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B89.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B85.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B85.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • GSM8K

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B96.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MATH-500

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B98.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME 2025

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B95%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B95.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • CharXiv (overall)

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B80.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • A-OKVQA

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B86.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OmniDocBench 1.6

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B89.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RealWorldQA

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B80.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OCRBench V2

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B56.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B91.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    Mini-Omni2
    Ternary Bonsai 2 27B74%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Questions

Which is better, Mini-Omni2 or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Mini-Omni2 or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

Mini-Omni2 is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Mini-Omni2 or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

Mini-Omni2 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Mini-Omni2 or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

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, Mini-Omni2 or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

A complete documented context-window comparison is not available.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 18, 2026

Watch Mini-Omni2 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

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

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.