Compare · pick a model
Compare the models people actually argue about.
Use shared tests, visible gaps, and close-call warnings before turning a benchmark lead into a public claim.
Compare controls
Keep the claim honest.
Use case and source filter stay visible up top. Edits, saves, follows, and links stay available without running the page.
Current frameBest for this use caseCoding copilot · All public sources
What should win?
Preset
Keep the same models, change the use case, and recompute the recommendation without resetting the page.
Sources
Models to compare
Keep the compare set tight. Add one model at a time, then prune aggressively.
Workspace utilities
Save, follow, or copy this exact setup only after the comparison looks right.
LFM2 2.6B leads this compare set for coding copilot.
Read this page as a workspace for choosing between top models, not as a universal crown. The current frame is Coding copilot under best for this use case.
Thin verified coverageThe current source data does not leave any qualifying rows once recency and evidence filters are applied.
Leader for this use caseLFM2 2.6B
Closest objectionNo clear runner-up yet
Shared tests1 shared benchmarks · 0 close calls
SourcesAll public sources
- Why the leader is ahead
- Chat / text
- Where the evidence is thin
- 0 close-call benchmarks and 39 missing missing leader rows keep this from reading as settled.
- What to do next
- Inspect decisive benchmarks first, then open the disagreement page or head-to-head pages if the top line still feels too narrow.
1 of 40 benchmarks
| Intelligence Index AA · index Text · Chat / text | 8n/a | n/a |
What is doing the visible work
- No decisive benchmark
- The shared tests are too split or too sparse for a clean separator.
What changes the winner
- LFM2 2.6B
- 39 visible benchmark gaps still leave room for the result to move.
Where evidence is missing
LFM2 2.6B
Missing visible evidence on this compare surface
39
How this weighting reads the field
The current decision mode is grounded in the Coding copilot preset. This keeps the compare page connected to a visible use case instead of an unspoken “overall winner” claim.
score = 1.45 × coding + 1.05 × reasoning math science + 0.80 × long contextcoverage floor = 55% · recency window = 120 days
Reading guide
How to read this workspace
Who wins most oftenBenchmarks with one clear percentile leader.Missing evidenceBenchmarks where a top model has no visible score.Decision readA public claim tied to an explicit use case and source filter.