LFM2.5-24B-A2B vs Sonar Pro
Updated October 21, 2026. No benchmark has tested both models yet. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.70
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 7.6
- Output $/M
- $15.00
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
LFM2.5-24B-A2B has the edge where output tokens cost 21.4x less.
No benchmark has tested both yet. LFM2.5-24B-A2B has none yet; Sonar Pro on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), AA Intelligence Index and GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run). Compare them on price and context instead.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Sonar Pro has a AA Intelligence Index result, 7.6.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Sonar Pro
Sonar Pro takes 200K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
LFM2.5-24B-A2B
LFM2.5-24B-A2B $0.0004, Sonar Pro $0.011 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- LFM2.5-24B-A2B not benchmarked, Sonar Pro 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 Sonar Pro $15.00 per million output tokens, 21.4x apart.
- Context window
- LFM2.5-24B-A2B takes 128K tokens, Sonar Pro 200K.
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.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index1 board measured
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | Sonar Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 27.5% | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | Sonar Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 7.6 | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | Sonar Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 57.8% | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 6.6% | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | Sonar Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 75.5% | Only Sonar Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
LFM2.5-24B-A2B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | LiquidAI LFM2.5-24B-A2B | Perplexity Sonar Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Liquid | Perplexity |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | October 13, 2026 | March 7, 2025 |
| Context window | 128K | 200K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.05 | $3.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.70 | $15.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is LFM2.5-24B-A2B better than Sonar Pro for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. LFM2.5-24B-A2B has the edge where output tokens cost 21.4x less.
Which is cheaper, LFM2.5-24B-A2B or Sonar Pro?
LFM2.5-24B-A2B costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Sonar Pro costs $3.00 and $15.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, LFM2.5-24B-A2B or Sonar Pro?
Sonar Pro, with 200K tokens against 128K.
Has any benchmark tested both LFM2.5-24B-A2B and Sonar Pro?
No benchmark has tested both yet. LFM2.5-24B-A2B has none yet; Sonar Pro on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), AA Intelligence Index and GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.