The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemini 3.8 Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 50.5 to 19.0.

Google · Liquid AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.5 to 19.0, ranking #17 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Gemini 3.8 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.5 and ranks #17 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose LFM2.5-2.6B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Gemini 3.8 Flash
Google
LFM2.5-2.6B
Liquid AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.5
#17
19.0
#208
Reasoning
46.9
#25
14.7
#228
Coding
38.6
#15
17.4
#121
Agents
35.6
#18
7.9
#135
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.75 / M
— / M
Output price
$3.75 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Gemini 3.8 Flash
LFM2.5-2.6B
Tool use
27.0#25
2.0#170
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Gemini 3.8 Flash · 9 for LFM2.5-2.6B

No common benchmarks found

Gemini 3.8 Flash and LFM2.5-2.6Bdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Gemini 3.8 Flash specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Gemini 3.8 Flash specifies output context (65,536 tokens).

Google
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Liquid AI
LFM2.5-2.6B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemini 3.8 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas LFM2.5-2.6B does not.

Gemini 3.8 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LFM2.5-2.6B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Gemini 3.8 Flash is licensed under a proprietary license, while LFM2.5-2.6B uses LFM Open License v1.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

LFM2.5-2.6B

LFM Open License v1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemini 3.8 Flash was released on 2026-09-02, while LFM2.5-2.6B was released on 2026-08-04.

Gemini 3.8 Flash is 1 month newer than LFM2.5-2.6B.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Sep 2, 2026

2 weeks ago

4w newer
LFM2.5-2.6B

Aug 4, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.8 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-03-31, while LFM2.5-2.6B's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 3.8 Flash's training data extends to 2026-03-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without LFM2.5-2.6B's cutoff date.

Gemini 3.8 Flash

Mar 2026

LFM2.5-2.6B

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.8 Flash and LFM2.5-2.6B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemini 3.8 Flash
✓ Preferred
LFM2.5-2.6B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemini 3.8 Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B.

Which is better, Gemini 3.8 Flash or LFM2.5-2.6B?

Gemini 3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 50.5 to 19.0. Gemini 3.8 Flash is made by Google and LFM2.5-2.6B is made by Liquid AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Gemini 3.8 Flash compare to LFM2.5-2.6B in benchmarks?

Gemini 3.8 Flash scores Terminal-Bench 2.1: 89.4%, LVBench: 87.1%, CharXiv-R: 86.2%, LABBench2: 86.2%, DeepSWE 1.1: 73.7%. LFM2.5-2.6B scores Multi-IF: 80.1%, PinchBench: 68.2%, Claw-Eval: 62.8%, LiveCodeBench v6: 59.4%, IFBench: 59.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Gemini 3.8 Flash and LFM2.5-2.6B?

Gemini 3.8 Flash supports 1.0M tokens and LFM2.5-2.6B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Gemini 3.8 Flash and LFM2.5-2.6B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.5 vs 19.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs LFM Open License v1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemini 3.8 Flash and LFM2.5-2.6B?

Gemini 3.8 Flash is developed by Google and LFM2.5-2.6B is developed by Liquid AI.

Related comparisons