Compare/LFM2.5-8B-A1B vs JT-35B-Flash

LFM2.5-8B-A1BvsJT-35B-Flash

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Liquid AI

LFM2.5-8B-A1B

Input
$0/M
Output
$0/M
Speed
339 tok/s
TTFT
1.95s
China Mobile

JT-35B-Flash

Input
Output
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
LFM2.5-8B-A1B
Faster (tok/s)
LFM2.5-8B-A1B
Lower Latency
LFM2.5-8B-A1B
Benchmarks (0-1)
JT-35B-Flash

Pricing Comparison

MetricLFM2.5-8B-A1BJT-35B-Flash
Input ($/M tokens)$0
Output ($/M tokens)$0
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
LFM2.5-8B-A1B$0.00

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
LFM2.5-8B-A1B
339 tok/s
JT-35B-Flash
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
LFM2.5-8B-A1B
1.95s
JT-35B-Flash

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. JT-35B-Flash takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 1–0 across 1 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.

Pricing. Pricing varies significantly between these models — check the table above for the exact per-token rates. Many production workloads actually surface input-token cost (retrieval-augmented prompts, code-context windows), so factor both directions.

Strengths. LFM2.5-8B-A1B is strongest on Intelligence Index (8.1). JT-35B-Flash leads on Intelligence Index (29.0).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. Liquid AI and China Mobile sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Liquid AI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while China Mobile often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
8.129.0
Coding Index
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
LFM2.5-8B-A1B0 wins
1 winsJT-35B-Flash

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, LFM2.5-8B-A1B or JT-35B-Flash?

LFM2.5-8B-A1B is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.00/M tokens vs $—/M for JT-35B-Flash.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

JT-35B-Flash wins 1 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for LFM2.5-8B-A1B. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

LFM2.5-8B-A1B generates tokens faster at 339 tok/s vs — tok/s. LFM2.5-8B-A1B also has lower time-to-first-token (1.95s vs —s).

When should I use LFM2.5-8B-A1B vs JT-35B-Flash?

Choose based on your priorities: LFM2.5-8B-A1B for lower cost, JT-35B-Flash for stronger benchmark performance, and LFM2.5-8B-A1B for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.