# Agents-A1-4B vs Hy3 (slim)

> Hy3 scores 62.6 (B) to Agents-A1-4B's 61 (C) for open-weight models you run yourself. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agents-a1-4b-vs-hy3.md (~5,700 tokens) · this version ~430 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agents-a1-4b-vs-hy3.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agents-a1-4b-vs-hy3
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-10-21
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Hy3 scores 62.6 (B) on agent readiness against Agents-A1-4B's 61 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Agents-A1-4B leads on reach. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

- Agents-A1-4B: C 61, rank #34 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/agents-a1-4b.min.md
- Hy3: B 62.6, rank #27 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/hy3.min.md
- Agents-A1-4B, good for Local agent loops (search, research, tool calls) on a laptop, a small GPU or a phone-class machine, under a plain licence Ahead on Reach, 90 against 70.
- Hy3, good for Teams with an 8-GPU server who want an agent-tuned MoE model under plain Apache 2.0 Ahead on Risk, 60 against 55; Agent interface, 75 against 70; Documentation and upkeep, 56 against 43.

| Category | Agents-A1-4B | Hy3 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | pending | pending |
| Reach (25%) | 90 | 70 |
| Risk (20%) | 55 | 60 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 70 | 75 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 43 | 56 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Agents-A1-4B | Hy3 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | InternScience (Shanghai AI Laboratory) | Tencent (Hy team) |
| Last release | 2026-07-14 | 2026-07-20 |
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (4) | 2.8/5 (4) |