Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. Pick North Mini Code for agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks or efficient sparse moe — 3b active of 30b, runs on a single h100. On a tight budget at scale, North Mini Code is the value pick.
Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside, US) and North Mini Code (Cohere, Canada) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. North Mini Code is cohere's first agentic coding model: an open-weight 30B/3B-active MoE built for real software-engineering and terminal tasks that runs on a single H100. They diverge most on price, context window and coding benchmarks — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Coding: Laguna XS 2.1 leads SWE-Bench Verified by 3.3 points (70.9% vs 67.6%) — a real edge on hard, real-world software tasks.
Recency: Laguna XS 2.1 is the newer model by about 23 days (released July 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-Canada matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
Laguna XS 2.1
North Mini Code
Provider
Poolside (US)
Cohere (Canada)
Released
July 2, 2026
June 9, 2026
Context window
256K (~393 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
70.9%
67.6%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — It scores 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified against North Mini Code's 67.6% — a 3.3-point edge on real repository work.
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime: Laguna XS 2.1 — A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven — and it leads SWE-Bench Verified 70.9% to 67.6%.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price: Laguna XS 2.1 — A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven — and it is the newer of the two.
Agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks: North Mini Code — Laguna XS 2.1 is comparatively weak here — weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise
Efficient sparse MoE — 3B active of 30B, runs on a single H100: North Mini Code — North Mini Code lists efficient sparse MoE — 3B active of 30B, runs on a single H100 among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
High throughput (up to 2.8x Devstral Small 2) at low latency: North Mini Code — North Mini Code lists high throughput (up to 2.8x Devstral Small 2) at low latency among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Lowest cost at scale: North Mini Code — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Laguna XS 2.1's $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: North Mini Code — At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Laguna XS 2.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Laguna XS 2.1 — Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks: North Mini Code — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code — Origin (US vs Canada) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs are real: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
North Mini Code: where it fits
Cohere's first agentic coding model: an open-weight 30B/3B-active MoE built for real software-engineering and terminal tasks that runs on a single H100. Released June 9, 2026 by Cohere, it is built for agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks, efficient sparse MoE — 3B active of 30B, runs on a single H100, high throughput (up to 2.8x Devstral Small 2) at low latency, and fully open weights under Apache 2.0 with fp8 and 4-bit builds.
Its trade-offs: text-only and coding-specialized — not multimodal or general-purpose, and 256K context and modest general-intelligence index trail frontier models. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Laguna XS 2.1 (US) and North Mini Code (Canada) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. North Mini Code is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Frequently asked questions
Is Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code better for coding?
On SWE-Bench Verified, Laguna XS 2.1 scores 70.9% and North Mini Code scores 67.6% — Laguna XS 2.1 has the measurable edge.
Which is cheaper, Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code?
North Mini Code is cheaper — $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs Open weight (self-host / free).
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Laguna XS 2.1 and North Mini Code together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Laguna XS 2.1, North Mini Code and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code?
Laguna XS 2.1 — released July 2, 2026, about 23 days after North Mini Code.
Laguna XS 2.1 vs North Mini Code
Poolside · US | Cohere · Canada · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. Pick North Mini Code for agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks or efficient sparse moe — 3b active of 30b, runs on a single h100. On a tight budget at scale, North Mini Code is the value pick.
Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside, US) and North Mini Code (Cohere, Canada) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. North Mini Code is cohere's first agentic coding model: an open-weight 30B/3B-active MoE built for real software-engineering and terminal tasks that runs on a single H100. They diverge most on price, context window and coding benchmarks — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Coding: Laguna XS 2.1 leads SWE-Bench Verified by 3.3 points (70.9% vs 67.6%) — a real edge on hard, real-world software tasks.
▸Recency: Laguna XS 2.1 is the newer model by about 23 days (released July 2, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-Canada matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Laguna XS 2.1
North Mini Code
Provider
Poolside (US)
Cohere (Canada)
Released
July 2, 2026
June 9, 2026
Context window
256K (~393 pages)
256K (~384 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
70.9%
67.6%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters
Laguna XS 2.1
It scores 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified against North Mini Code's 67.6% — a 3.3-point edge on real repository work.
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime
Laguna XS 2.1
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven — and it leads SWE-Bench Verified 70.9% to 67.6%.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price
Laguna XS 2.1
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven — and it is the newer of the two.
Agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks
North Mini Code
Laguna XS 2.1 is comparatively weak here — weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise
Efficient sparse MoE — 3B active of 30B, runs on a single H100
North Mini Code
North Mini Code lists efficient sparse MoE — 3B active of 30B, runs on a single H100 among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
High throughput (up to 2.8x Devstral Small 2) at low latency
North Mini Code
North Mini Code lists high throughput (up to 2.8x Devstral Small 2) at low latency among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
North Mini Code
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Laguna XS 2.1's $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ North Mini Code
At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Laguna XS 2.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Laguna XS 2.1
Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters
→ Laguna XS 2.1
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks
→ North Mini Code
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code
Origin (US vs Canada) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs are real: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
North Mini Code: where it fits
Cohere's first agentic coding model: an open-weight 30B/3B-active MoE built for real software-engineering and terminal tasks that runs on a single H100. Released June 9, 2026 by Cohere, it is built for agentic software engineering, code generation, and terminal tasks, efficient sparse MoE — 3B active of 30B, runs on a single H100, high throughput (up to 2.8x Devstral Small 2) at low latency, and fully open weights under Apache 2.0 with fp8 and 4-bit builds.
Its trade-offs: text-only and coding-specialized — not multimodal or general-purpose, and 256K context and modest general-intelligence index trail frontier models. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Laguna XS 2.1 (US) and North Mini Code (Canada) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. North Mini Code is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Want both Laguna XS 2.1 and North Mini Code without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code better for coding?
On SWE-Bench Verified, Laguna XS 2.1 scores 70.9% and North Mini Code scores 67.6% — Laguna XS 2.1 has the measurable edge.
Which is cheaper, Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code?
North Mini Code is cheaper — $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs Open weight (self-host / free).
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Laguna XS 2.1 and North Mini Code together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Laguna XS 2.1, North Mini Code and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Laguna XS 2.1 or North Mini Code?
Laguna XS 2.1 — released July 2, 2026, about 23 days after North Mini Code.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.