Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

LFM2.5-24B-A2B vs Llama Guard 4 12B

Llama Guard 4 12B costs 3.9x less per output token than LFM2.5-24B-A2B ($0.18 vs $0.70 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Replace LFM2.5-24B-A2B Replace Llama Guard 4 12B
LFM2.5-24B-A2BLiquid
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.70
Llama Guard 4 12BMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.18
vs $0.70 vs $0.18 per 1M output tokens. Llama Guard 4 12B is 3.9x cheaper.

LFM2.5-24B-A2B or Llama Guard 4 12B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Model ALFM2.5-24B-A2BLiquidNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BLlama Guard 4 12BMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
LFM2.5-24B-A2B not benchmarked, Llama Guard 4 12B not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
LFM2.5-24B-A2B $0.70 against Llama Guard 4 12B $0.18 per million output tokens, 3.9x apart.
Context window
LFM2.5-24B-A2B takes 128K tokens, Llama Guard 4 12B 164K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

LFM2.5-24B-A2B$0.0004Fits in one request
Llama Guard 4 12B$0.0003Fits in one request

Llama Guard 4 12B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

LFM2.5-24B-A2B$0.0046Fits in one request
Llama Guard 4 12B$0.0095Fits in one request

LFM2.5-24B-A2B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

LFM2.5-24B-A2B$0.017Exceeds the context window
Llama Guard 4 12B$0.038Exceeds the context window

LFM2.5-24B-A2B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of LFM2.5-24B-A2B and Llama Guard 4 12B
SpecificationLiquidAI LFM2.5-24B-A2BMeta Llama Guard 4 12B
MakerLiquidMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 13, 2026April 30, 2025
Context window128K164K
Input $/Mtok$0.05$0.18
Output $/Mtok$0.70$0.18
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is LFM2.5-24B-A2B better than Llama Guard 4 12B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, LFM2.5-24B-A2B or Llama Guard 4 12B?

LFM2.5-24B-A2B costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Llama Guard 4 12B costs $0.18 and $0.18. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, LFM2.5-24B-A2B or Llama Guard 4 12B?

Llama Guard 4 12B, with 164K tokens against 128K.

Has any benchmark tested both LFM2.5-24B-A2B and Llama Guard 4 12B?

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next