# LFM2.5-2.6B vs Step 3.7 Flash

> Side-by-side benchmark comparison for LFM2.5-2.6B and Step 3.7 Flash across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, multilingual, and math tasks.

- Canonical page: https://benchlm.ai/compare/lfm2-5-2-6b-vs-step-3-7-flash
- Last updated: September 18, 2026

- Shared sourced benchmarks: 1
- HTML indexing: indexable
- Ranking lane: BenchAlign v5

## Quick Verdict

Evidence is too thin for a benchmark verdict: LFM2.5-2.6B and Step 3.7 Flash share only 1 sourced benchmark row.

## Summary

- Only 1 shared sourced benchmark row is available. That is not enough for a broad capability verdict, so this mirror does not name an overall winner.
- LFM2.5-2.6B has the lower published output-token price.
- Step 3.7 Flash has the larger published context window at 256K.

## Model Snapshot

| Property | LFM2.5-2.6B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|----------|----------|----------|
| Creator | LiquidAI | StepFun |
| Type | Open Weight | Open Weight |
| Reasoning | Reasoning | Reasoning |
| Context | 128K | 256K |
| Independent public score (not head-to-head) | 39.9 | 49.78 |
| Benchmarks Covered | 7 | 11 |
| Pricing (input/output) | $0.00 / $0.00 | $0.20 / $1.15 |

## Category Breakdown

### Agentic

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- LFM2.5-2.6B public-lane score: 37.2 (Estimated · #131/154)
- Step 3.7 Flash public-lane score: 48.7 (Estimated · #66/154)

| Benchmark | LFM2.5-2.6B | Step 3.7 Flash | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| BFCL v4 | 56.9% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| τ³-bench results | 5.7% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| Claw-Eval | 62.9% | 67.1% | Step 3.7 Flash |
| PinchBench | 68.2% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Coming soon | 59.5% | Coming soon |
| BrowseComp | Coming soon | 75.8% | Coming soon |
| DeepSearchQA | Coming soon | 92.8% | Coming soon |
| Toolathlon | Coming soon | 49.5% | Coming soon |
| HLE w/ tools | Coming soon | 47.2% | Coming soon |
| Gert Labs | Coming soon | 51.57% | Coming soon |

### Coding

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- LFM2.5-2.6B public-lane score: 39.2 (Estimated · #125/154)
- Step 3.7 Flash public-lane score: 47.4 (Estimated · #77/154)

| Benchmark | LFM2.5-2.6B | Step 3.7 Flash | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| LiveCodeBench v6 | 59.4% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| SWE-bench Pro | Coming soon | 56.3% | Coming soon |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Coming soon | 59.5% | Coming soon |

### Multimodal & Grounded

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- LFM2.5-2.6B public-lane score: Coming soon
- Step 3.7 Flash public-lane score: 71 (Unranked · 3 rankable rows)

| Benchmark | LFM2.5-2.6B | Step 3.7 Flash | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| SimpleVQA | Coming soon | 79.2% | Coming soon |
| V* | Coming soon | 95.3% | Coming soon |

### Reasoning

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- LFM2.5-2.6B public-lane score: 24.9 (Unranked · 2 rankable rows)
- Step 3.7 Flash public-lane score: 71.7 (Unranked · 2 rankable rows)

### Knowledge

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- LFM2.5-2.6B public-lane score: 37 (Estimated · #151/184)
- Step 3.7 Flash public-lane score: 48.6 (Estimated · #94/184)

### Instruction Following

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- LFM2.5-2.6B public-lane score: 38.1 (#104/124)
- Step 3.7 Flash public-lane score: 80.6 (#53/124)

| Benchmark | LFM2.5-2.6B | Step 3.7 Flash | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| IFBench | 59.2% | Coming soon | Coming soon |

### Mathematics

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- LFM2.5-2.6B public-lane score: Coming soon
- Step 3.7 Flash public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | LFM2.5-2.6B | Step 3.7 Flash | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| AIME 2025 | 51.9% | Coming soon | Coming soon |

## FAQ

### Is there enough evidence to pick between LFM2.5-2.6B and Step 3.7 Flash?

Not yet. The models share only 1 sourced benchmark row, so this mirror reports the available measurements and metadata without naming a broad winner.

### What can I compare safely on this page?

Published pricing, context windows, model type, and individual shared benchmark rows are directly comparable. Independent overall scores and non-overlapping benchmark coverage are labeled separately and should not be read as a controlled head-to-head result.

## Related Comparisons

- [LFM2.5-2.6B vs Claude Fable 5.1](/compare/claude-fable-5-1-vs-lfm2-5-2-6b)
- [Step 3.7 Flash vs Claude Fable 5.1](/compare/claude-fable-5-1-vs-step-3-7-flash)
- [LFM2.5-2.6B vs GPT-6 Astra](/compare/gpt-6-astra-vs-lfm2-5-2-6b)
- [Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra](/compare/gpt-6-astra-vs-step-3-7-flash)

## Explore More

- [LFM2.5-2.6B profile](/models/lfm2-5-2-6b)
- [Step 3.7 Flash profile](/models/step-3-7-flash)
- [Compare Pricing](/llm-pricing)
- [Alternative Finder](/tools/alternative-finder)
- [LLM Selector](/tools/llm-selector)
- [Overall Rankings](/best/overall)