Models / Jev 1.14
TypeSafe
Jev 1.14
Early evidence, 10 results from 1 source, on 1 use case. Jev 1.14 is strongest at speed under pressure; it is not on sale through OpenRouter, so it is here for reference.
Results 13 Nov 2026 · 10 results · 1 source
- Price per million tokens
- Not available through OpenRouter
- Speed
- Not measured
- Intelligence Index
- Not measured
- Spring Prompt overall
- Not ranked yet
needs our benchmarks and two groups of results - Developer
- TypeSafe
Weights not published - Released
- Not recorded
no launch date in our tracker or our sources
Measured cost per task
API cost recorded in our benchmark runs, excluding judging.
| Task | Benchmark | Cost per task |
|---|---|---|
| Game of bullet chess | BulletBench | ≈ $0.001 |
How good is it, and for what?
Each use case ranks the available models its benchmarks measured. The bar shows its percentile in that field, best to the right. Open a row for the results behind it.
Product listingsTurning a sparse product feed and photos into listings that can go live
- CatalogBench: has not measured this model.
Decks from an analysisTurning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is
- DeckBench: has not measured this model.
User surveysPlanning a user survey and reading its results without being misled
- SurveyBench: has not measured this model.
Marketing planningPlanning a year of ad spend without overspending
- ROASBench: has not measured this model.
Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls
- tau2-bench: has not measured this model.
- Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4: has not measured this model.
- OpenHands Index: has not measured this model.
- Microsoft STATE-Bench: has not measured this model.
- Artificial Analysis: has not measured this model.
- Vending-Bench 2: has not measured this model.
Professional workReal tasks from banking, consulting and law, business documents and freelance projects
- APEX-Agents: has not measured this model.
- GDP.pdf: has not measured this model.
- Remote Labor Index: has not measured this model.
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge
- Artificial Analysis: has not measured this model.
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality
- Arena (formerly LMArena): has not measured this model.
- UGI Leaderboard: has not measured this model.
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers
- Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard: has not measured this model.
- Arena (formerly LMArena): has not measured this model.
- SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI): has not measured this model.
Speed under pressureGood decisions against a real clock (fast chess)
| Benchmark | Jev 1.14 | Rank among available | Best available |
|---|---|---|---|
| BulletBenchBulletBench Lightning 10+1: ladder Elo | 529 | 9th of 18 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 892 |
| BulletBenchBulletBench Bullet 60s: ladder Elo | 529 | 9th of 33 | Gemini 3.8 Flash 1,068 |
Nearest alternatives
- The most capable open-weights modelMiMo-V2.6-Pro$0.54 blended · Intelligence Index 46.3
Against Jev 1.14. "Similar intelligence" means within 4 points or better.
Against the alternatives
The models you would most likely weigh it against: the leaders of the groups above.
Scroll sideways to see every alternative.
| Jev 1.14 | Claude Fable 5.2 leads overall | Claude Opus 5.5 near the top overall | GPT-6.1 Terra near the top overall | GPT-6.1 Sol near the top overall | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | – | $16.00 | $8.00 | $2.00 | $4.00 |
| Tokens a second | – | – | 96 | – | 53 |
| Intelligence Index | – | – | 57.6 | – | 51.8 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | 91 | 82 | 81 | 80 |
| Rank among available models, by use case | |||||
| Product listings | – | 5th | 13th | 4th | 2nd |
| Decks from an analysis | – | 3rd | 5th | 7th | 4th |
| User surveys | – | 1st | 4th | 6th | 3rd |
| Marketing planning | – | 1st | 9th | 2nd | – |
| Agents and tool use | – | – | 3rd | 7th | 6th |
| Professional work | – | – | 3rd | – | 9th |
| Reasoning and knowledge | – | – | 1st | 22nd | 6th |
| Writing | – | – | 5th | – | 16th |
| Sticking to the facts | – | – | 3rd | – | 18th |
| Speed under pressure | 11th of 35 | 8th | – | 19th | 3rd |
Shaded figures are better than Jev 1.14's. A dash means no result.
Where it has been measured
Compared with the models available today (it is not on sale itself), mid-field on speed under pressure, the one use case measured.
Not timed: Artificial Analysis, our source for speed, has not tested it
- BulletBench10 results
- CatalogBenchNot measured
- DeckBenchNot measured
- ROASBenchNot measured
- SurveyBenchNot measured
- APEX-AgentsNot measured
- Arena (formerly LMArena)Not measured
- Artificial AnalysisNot measured
- Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4Not measured
- GDP.pdfNot measured
- Microsoft STATE-BenchNot measured
- OpenHands IndexNot measured
- Remote Labor IndexNot measured
- SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI)Not measured
- tau2-benchNot measured
- UGI LeaderboardNot measured
- Vectara Hallucination LeaderboardNot measured
- Vending-Bench 2Not measured
Every result
10 published results from 1 source, each in the source's own units, with the configuration that produced it.
BulletBench · measured by Spring Prompt · 10 results
| Measure | Value | Rank | Configuration | Dated |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BulletBench Bullet 60s: cost per gameUS dollars, lower is better | $0.0014 | 19 of 70 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Bullet 60s: games lost on time% of games, lower is better | 0.0% | 1 of 70 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Bullet 60s: invalid moves% of moves, lower is better | 0.0% | 1 of 70 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Bullet 60s: ladder Eloladder Elo, higher is better | 529 404–671 |
27 of 70 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Bullet 60s: median move timemilliseconds, lower is better | 0.5 s | 4 of 70 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Lightning 10+1: cost per gameUS dollars, lower is better | $0.0010 | 18 of 46 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Lightning 10+1: games lost on time% of games, lower is better | 0.0% | 1 of 46 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Lightning 10+1: invalid moves% of moves, lower is better | 0.0% | 1 of 46 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Lightning 10+1: ladder Eloladder Elo, higher is better | 529 382–670 |
23 of 46 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
| BulletBench Lightning 10+1: median move timemilliseconds, lower is better | 0.5 s | 4 of 46 | Jev 1.14 provider default reasoning |
12 Nov 2026 |
Not shown: Not your cost: prices are those charged on the run date.
Embed a score badge
A badge for each of our benchmarks that ranked Jev 1.14, from the current results. Paste the code into a page or README; it links back to the benchmark.
BulletBench · Lightning 10+1
<a href="https://springprompt.com/benchmarks/bulletbench?focus=typesafe-jev-1-14"><img src="https://springprompt.com/badge/bulletbench/typesafe-jev-1-14.svg" alt="Jev 1.14 is #23 of 44 on BulletBench (Lightning 10+1: 529), measured by Spring Prompt" height="20"></a>Test your own prompt.
Benchmarks aren't your task. Run your prompt on the models you could use, with every answer checked and costed.