Model Comparison
LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking
vs. Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Liquid AI, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
44.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
31.6 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) leads LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking by 28.4 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) leads LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking by 30.2 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) wins 11 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking
Liquid AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Li LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.40/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $3.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $1.10/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Liquid AI | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Jan 20, 2026 | Feb 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 166.3 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1061ms |
| Latency | — | 1061ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 16.0 | 44.5 |
| Intelligence | 8.1 | 35.9 |
| Coding | 1.4 | 31.6 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 33.9% | 82.7% |
| HLE | 6.1% | 14.8% |
| SciCode | 4.2% | 35.6% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 56.0% |
| IFBench | 41.8% | 50.8% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 19.6% | 84.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 0.0% | 29.5% |
Key Takeaways
LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 44.5 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 31.6 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
