Heads up for DeepSWE benchmark: The cost is measured per task, not the total run.

Reddit r/singularity News

Summary

The DeepSWE benchmark costs are per task, not per total run. Running models like Mimo V2.5 Pro can cost ~$225 for a full run, while Mimo V2.5 non-pro costs ~$7.15. Users should be aware of this before running expensive models.

I was running the Deep SWE benchmark and saw Mimo V2.5 Pro at $1.99 and figured running Mimo V2.5 (non-pro) would be cheaper than $1.99. But actually, it's not like Artificial Analysis where it measure the total amount, you need to multiply that by the total number of tasks, which is 113 tasks. This means that Mimo V2.5 Pro is actually \~$225 for a full run and GPT 5.5 medium is a total of \~$264. Fortunately, based on the cost for a complete run of Mimo V2.5 (non-pro) for the first 14 tasks at about $0.89, it seems like it's going to cost a total of \~$7.15, so I'm still planning to let it run. But just beware if you're about to run the benchmark with a more expensive model thinking that it's a cheap benchmark to run in general. Here's the projection based on what it's done so far: ### **So far (14 tasks) — Total Cost: $0.89** * **Cache hits (98.8%):** 153.5M tokens | $0.43 * **Cache misses (1.2%):** 1.8M tokens | $0.25 * **Output:** 723K tokens | $0.20 ### **Projected (113 tasks) — Total Cost: ~$7.15** * **Cache hit cost:** $3.47 * **Cache miss cost:** $2.04 * **Output cost:** $1.64
Original Article

Similar Articles

Can a MUD evaluate LLMs? A $99 proof of concept

Hacker News Top

CrucibleBench places language models in a persistent MUD environment to evaluate agent behavior over 50 turns with hidden social objectives. The proof-of-concept release with 13 models revealed that using an LLM judge component can reorder leaderboards significantly, highlighting the need for reporting ranking stability under judge ablation.

Solve the CyberGym benchmark

Reddit r/LocalLLaMA

A paper presenting a solution to the CyberGym benchmark, a cybersecurity AI evaluation framework.