Model comparison
Laguna M.1 vs Ring-2.6-1T
Laguna M.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#252); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Poolside
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Ring-2.6-1T leads 40.1 to 36.4.
Side by side
| Laguna M.1 | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Poolside | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 31.9 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2026-04-28 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 3 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads
Laguna M.1: 36.4 (#195), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1
| Benchmark | Laguna M.1 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1348 | — |
| SciCode | — | 42.4% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 432.57 |
Reasoning Ring-2.6-1T leads
Laguna M.1: 21.9 (#187), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3
| Benchmark | Laguna M.1 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 3.7% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 15.6% | — |
Math Not comparable
Laguna M.1: 20.3 (#276), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Laguna M.1 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 0% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Laguna M.1 better than Ring-2.6-1T?
Laguna M.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#252); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Laguna M.1 or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Laguna M.1 and Ring-2.6-1T share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Laguna M.1 has 3 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.