LFM2.5-24B-A2B is $0.02 cheaper per 1M input tokens (33.3% lower; 1.5x difference).
API cost decision in 10 seconds
NewLFM2.5-24B-A2B vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
Pick Ternary Bonsai 2 27B when budget and context both matter.
Budget verdict
Pick Ternary Bonsai 2 27B when budget and context both matter.
On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is estimated at $0.33 vs $0.4 for LFM2.5-24B-A2B, saving $0.07 (18.7% lower).
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is cheaper on the standard workload and also has the larger context window. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $0.75. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.
Cost sensitivity
Workload Sensitivity
Cost winner changes by workload shape: input-heavy / RAG favors LFM2.5-24B-A2B, balanced workload favors Ternary Bonsai 2 27B, and output-heavy chatbot favors Ternary Bonsai 2 27B.
| Workload shape | Token mix | Better pick | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input-heavy / RAG | 5M input + 500K output | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | $0.6 | $0.62 |
| Balanced workload | 1M input + 1M output | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | $0.75 | $0.57 |
| Output-heavy chatbot | 1M input + 5M output | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | $3.55 | $2.58 |
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is $0.2 cheaper per 1M output tokens (28.6% lower; 1.4x difference).
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has 134.14K more context (2.05x larger).
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is $0.07 cheaper on the standard workload (18.7% lower).
Estimate your workload cost
Your Workload Cost
This estimate uses normalized public API pricing per 1M tokens. It is a planning aid, not a billing quote. Verify provider pricing, limits, and terms before production use.
Quick Decision
LFM2.5-24B-A2B has the lower input price; Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has the lower output price; Ternary Bonsai 2 27B offers the larger context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is cheaper for the standard workload.
For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $0.4 for LFM2.5-24B-A2B and $0.33 for Ternary Bonsai 2 27B.
Choose LFM2.5-24B-A2B when you care most about lower input-token price.
Choose Ternary Bonsai 2 27B when you care most about lower output-token price, and larger context window.
- On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is estimated at $0.33 vs $0.4 for LFM2.5-24B-A2B, saving $0.07 (18.7% lower).
- Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is $0.07 cheaper on the standard workload (18.7% lower).
- LFM2.5-24B-A2B is $0.02 cheaper per 1M input tokens (33.3% lower; 1.5x difference).
- Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is $0.2 cheaper per 1M output tokens (28.6% lower; 1.4x difference).
- Ternary Bonsai 2 27B has 134.14K more context (2.05x larger).
| Feature | NewLFM2.5-24B-A2B (LiquidAI) | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B (PrismML) |
|---|---|---|
| Input Price prompt tokens per 1M | $0.05 | $0.075 |
| Completion Price per 1M tokens | $0.7 | $0.5 |
| Sample Workload Cost 1M input + 500K output | $0.4 | $0.33 |
| Context Window | 128K | 262.14K |
| Release Date |
Use-Case Decision Matrix
| Use case | Better pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Budget-constrained production | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B is estimated at $0.33 vs $0.4 for LFM2.5-24B-A2B, saving $0.07 (18.7% lower). |
| High-volume input processing | LFM2.5-24B-A2B | Lower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill. |
| Long responses and chatbots | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | Lower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens. |
| RAG or long-document work | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files. |
Related Alternatives
- LFM2.5-2.6B (free) can replace LFM2.5-24B-A2B when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking (free) can replace LFM2.5-24B-A2B when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct (free) can replace LFM2.5-24B-A2B when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- LFM2-24B-A2B can replace LFM2.5-24B-A2B when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.09.
- Llama 4 Scout offers 1.31M context with $0.47 sample workload cost.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash offers 1.05M context with $0.28 sample workload cost.
- GPT-6 Luna offers 1.05M context with $0.35 sample workload cost.
- GPT-6 Luna Pro offers 1.05M context with $0.35 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · DeepSeek · #1
- Step 5 Preview · StepFun · #2
- GLM 5.3 Flash · Z.ai · #3
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash · Xiaomi · #4
Cheaper alternatives
Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.
Open cheapest modelsLarger context alternatives
Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.
Open largest context modelsProvider catalogs
Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.
Open provider hubsLiquidAI catalog
Review all tracked LiquidAI models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.
Open LiquidAI modelsPrismML catalog
Check other PrismML models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.
Open PrismML modelsLFM2.5-24B-A2B is a mixture-of-experts reasoning model from Liquid AI with 24B total and 2.45B active parameters. It always reasons before answering and is built for agents that call tools. Liquid...
Bonsai 2 27B is a 27B-parameter reasoning model from PrismML derived from Qwen3.8-27B. It supports coding, mathematics, tool calling, and image understanding with a 262K-token context window. Ternary compression shrinks...