Laguna S 2.1 vs Hunyuan A13B Instruct
Laguna S 2.1 costs 3.2x less per output token than Hunyuan A13B Instruct ($0.18 vs $0.57 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.18
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.57
Laguna S 2.1 or Hunyuan A13B Instruct: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Laguna S 2.1 for output tokens 3.2x cheaper ($0.18 vs $0.57 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 131K tokens).
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Laguna S 2.1
Laguna S 2.1 takes 1.05M tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Laguna S 2.1
Laguna S 2.1 $0.0002, Hunyuan A13B Instruct $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Laguna S 2.1 not benchmarked, Hunyuan A13B Instruct 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
- Laguna S 2.1 $0.18 against Hunyuan A13B Instruct $0.57 per million output tokens, 3.2x apart.
- Context window
- Laguna S 2.1 takes 1.05M tokens, Hunyuan A13B Instruct 131K.
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
Laguna S 2.1 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Laguna S 2.1 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Laguna S 2.1 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 | Poolside Laguna S 2.1 | Tencent Hunyuan A13B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Poolside | Tencent |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | July 21, 2026 | July 8, 2025 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.09 | $0.14 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.18 | $0.57 |
| 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 Laguna S 2.1 better than Hunyuan A13B Instruct for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Laguna S 2.1 for output tokens 3.2x cheaper ($0.18 vs $0.57 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 131K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Laguna S 2.1 or Hunyuan A13B Instruct?
Laguna S 2.1 costs $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.18 per million output tokens; Hunyuan A13B Instruct costs $0.14 and $0.57. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Laguna S 2.1 or Hunyuan A13B Instruct?
Laguna S 2.1, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
Has any benchmark tested both Laguna S 2.1 and Hunyuan A13B Instruct?
No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them. Data as of October 22, 2026.