Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
Agents-A1-4B and LFM3-Audio-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). LFM3-Audio-2B leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best 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 80
- Risk, 55 against 40
Watch for
The base isn't declared, and the technical report doesn't cover the 4B
Best for Voice agents on a laptop or phone that need speech in, speech out and tool calls from one small model
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 85 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 52 against 43
Watch for
Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release, though the card lists vLLM and SGLang
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Risk Agents-A1-4B +15
Agents-A1-4B 55
File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only and nothing from the repository runs. Provenance 15, the files are in the InternScience organisation its GitHub repository links to, with a SHA-256 for every weight file. Safety evaluation 0 and agent guidance 0, nothing published. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 through the chain from Qwen3.5-4B with no conditions added. Security programme 0, no policy, contact or security.txt.
LFM3-Audio-2B 40
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, files in the LiquidAI organisation, which Liquid's docs page for the model and its blog post link to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in Liquid's blog post for the LFM3 family, neither of which mentions safety testing. Agent guidance 0, Nothing on prompt injection, an instruction hierarchy, what refusals cover or safeguards to add. Licence risk 10, 15 less 5 for the $10M annual revenue threshold on commercial use. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 40.
Agent interface LFM3-Audio-2B +15
Agents-A1-4B 70
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 10, the card names the qwen3_coder parser but the format is only in the template. Trained tool calling 20, the card says it was trained for tool use and the template renders several calls in one turn. Structured output 0. Reasoning control 10, the template turns thinking off per request and the card's reasoning parser returns it apart from the answer. Context 10, 262,144 tokens.
LFM3-Audio-2B 85
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (9,328 characters), with roles, audio, tools, deferred tools and tool results. Tool-calling format 25, the card and Liquid's tool-use page document tools passed through tools= in apply_chat_template, calls returned as XML and results sent back as tool messages. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over every entry in an assistant turn's tool_calls, so several calls fit in one turn, and the card names turning spoken requests into tool calls as one of its four uses. Structured output 5, the card says the model is designed for structured outputs without saying how to ask for JSON. Liquid's API guide documents response_format with lfm3-1.7b as its example. Reasoning control 10, the card documents reasoning per request for text replies: the caller prefills the assistant turn with an open think tag to let the model reason, or a closed one for a direct answer, with a use_thinking example. Context 5, 32K tokens of input and output per the card. 20 + 25 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 5 = 85.
Reach Agents-A1-4B +10
Agents-A1-4B 90
Memory 30, InternScience's Q4_K_M GGUF with its vision projector is 3.4 GB and needs about 4.1 GB with the fifth added. Runtimes 20, the Qwen3.5 architecture runs in released vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp, while Ollama's and LM Studio's entries are the base's, not this model's. Builds 15, InternScience publishes FP8 and three GGUF precisions. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 with nothing added. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, one inference provider serves it and the line needs two.
LFM3-Audio-2B 80
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.17 GB projector file, and 1.27 GB × 1.2 = 1.5 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 10, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture with the LFM3 audio projector and speech output (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242, with a realtime client example that starts this model), and Ollama's library has an lfm3-audio entry. Builds 15, Liquid's GGUF repository holds Q4_0, Q4_K_M, Q8_0, F16 and BF16 files, and Liquid publishes 4-bit and 8-bit MLX builds and an ONNX repository, all in the LiquidAI organisation. Terms 10, the LFM Open License v1.0, a custom licence that lets anyone use it commercially for free below a threshold of $10M annual revenue. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its GGUF, MLX and ONNX repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, Liquid's own API lists lfm3-audio-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 80.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-Audio-2B +9
Agents-A1-4B 43
Model card 8, it covers intended use, parameters and context but not the architecture, limitations, languages or a knowledge cut-off. Training data 5, a general description with no cut-off. Last change 10, the files went up on 14 July 2026, 112 days before 3 November 2026, and the GitHub repository's last commit is 16 July. Responsiveness 10, InternScience answered one of the three discussions, unchanged on 3 November 2026. Version policy 5, a first release. File health 5, the files agree on the essentials, but the config declares a prediction layer that isn't shipped and the template carries a dated default prompt.
LFM3-Audio-2B 52
Model card 17, Intended use (local agents, tool calling, structured outputs, fine-tuning), limitations (not recommended for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning, voice chat in English only), an architecture section, parameters (2B), context (32K) and 19 speech languages and locales. Training data 5, the card has no training section. Last change 20, the last commit, on 3 November 2026, changed the card's navigation icons, seven days before this check, and the one before it, on 31 October, edited the card. Responsiveness 0, Neither of the 2 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 and 31 October 2026) has a reply from a LiquidAI member. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 5, the card gives a 32K context while config.json gives the language model 128,000 positions and Liquid's API lists 128,000 for the hosted model, so the card and the files don't agree on context. 17 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 52.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Agents-A1-4B | LFM3-Audio-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 90 | 80 | Agents-A1-4B +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 40 | Agents-A1-4B +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 85 | LFM3-Audio-2B +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 43 | 52 | LFM3-Audio-2B +9 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Agents-A1-4B | LFM3-Audio-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | InternScience (Shanghai AI Laboratory) | Liquid AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-07-14 | 2026-11-03 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
Agents-A1-4B
A small agent cousin for search, research and tool-calling loops, with vision and 262,144 tokens of context. It runs in about 4 GB from InternScience's Q4_K_M GGUF, in vLLM, SGLang, Transformers or llama.cpp. The main risks are an undeclared base, no safety results or agent guidance, and a template that adds its own dated system prompt when you send none.
LFM3-Audio-2B
A 2B model that listens and speaks on an 8 GB machine, transcribes and translates 19 languages and turns spoken requests into tool calls. Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release. The context is 32K, voice chat is English only, Liquid hasn't answered the repository's questions, and there are no safety results or data sources.
Before you call either
Agents-A1-4B
- Quickest start is
llama-server -hf InternScience/Agents-A1-4B-Q4_K_M-GGUF --jinja, about 3.4 GB with the vision projector - With vLLM use
--reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, as on the card, and add--language-model-onlyfor text-only work - Always send your own system message, or the template inserts InternScience's default prompt with the date fixed at 2026-07-14
- The card recommends temperature 0.85, top_p 0.95, top_k 20, min_p 0 and presence_penalty 1.1, and there is no generation_config.json to set them
- Thinking is on by default, send
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention - The config declares a multi-token prediction layer that isn't shipped, so don't turn on MTP speculative decoding
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
LFM3-Audio-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-Audio-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-audio - llama.cpp ships examples/realtime_client.py for live speech with this model
- Prefill the assistant turn with an open think tag to let it reason before a text reply
- The context is 32K
- Voice chat is English only, while transcription, synthesis and translation cover 19 languages and locales
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Agents-A1-4B or LFM3-Audio-2B?
Agents-A1-4B and LFM3-Audio-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). LFM3-Audio-2B leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with Agents-A1-4B or LFM3-Audio-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Apertus v1.5 8B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Apodex-1.1-mini
- Agents-A1-4B vs Arete-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs BigBang-v1
- Agents-A1-4B vs Carbon-X
- Agents-A1-4B vs Cosmos-Reason2-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Agents-A1-4B vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-5.3
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Agents-A1-4B vs gpt-oss-20b
- Agents-A1-4B vs Granite 4.2 30B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Granite 4.2 8B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Hy3
- Agents-A1-4B vs Inkling
- Agents-A1-4B vs Inkling-Small
- Agents-A1-4B vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Agents-A1-4B vs Kimi K3
- Agents-A1-4B vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Agents-A1-4B vs Kolibri-1
- Agents-A1-4B vs Kronos
- Agents-A1-4B vs Laguna M.1
- Agents-A1-4B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Agents-A1-4B vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs Mistral Large 4
- Agents-A1-4B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Agents-A1-4B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Agents-A1-4B vs occamy-1.0
- Agents-A1-4B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Agents-A1-4B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Agents-A1-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Agents-A1-4B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Inkling vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kronos vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/agents-a1-4b-vs-lfm3-audio-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/agents-a1-4b.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm3-audio-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare agents-a1-4b lfm3-audio-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "agents-a1-4b", "b": "lfm3-audio-2b"}at/mcp, no key