Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM5-2B

Agents-A1-4B and MiniCPM5-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.2 (C). MiniCPM5-2B 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 2870 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Agents-A1-4B C

Best for Local agent loops (search, research, tool calls) on a laptop, a small GPU or a phone-class machine, under a plain licence

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

The base isn't declared, and the technical report doesn't cover the 4B

MiniCPM5-2B C

Best for On-device and laptop agents that want a 2 GB tool-calling helper with long context and open training data

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 75 against 70
  • Documentation and upkeep, 97 against 43

Watch for

OpenBMB documents only a Think mode for the 2B, so every answer starts with reasoning

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runAgents-A1-4BMiniCPM5-2BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259090even
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%107075MiniCPM5-2B +5
Documentation and upkeep10%104397MiniCPM5-2B +54
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 60.2/100

Facts side by side

FactAgents-A1-4BMiniCPM5-2B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorInternScience (Shanghai AI Laboratory)OpenBMB
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-142026-09-29
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews3/5 (4)3/5 (4)

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.

MiniCPM5-2B

A tiny dense cousin for local tool calling and long context, with published training data and an active publisher. OpenBMB's own 4-bit builds need about 2 GB, so it runs on a laptop or phone in vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp, Ollama or Transformers. The main risks are always-on thinking, no safety results and use conditions beyond Apache 2.0.

Before you call either

Agents-A1-4B

  1. Quickest start is llama-server -hf InternScience/Agents-A1-4B-Q4_K_M-GGUF --jinja, about 3.4 GB with the vision projector
  2. With vLLM use --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, as on the card, and add --language-model-only for text-only work
  3. Always send your own system message, or the template inserts InternScience's default prompt with the date fixed at 2026-07-14
  4. 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
  5. Thinking is on by default, send chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention
  6. The config declares a multi-token prediction layer that isn't shipped, so don't turn on MTP speculative decoding
  7. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

MiniCPM5-2B

  1. Smallest start is ollama run openbmb/minicpm5-2b (1.6 GB, q4_k_m)
  2. On vLLM 0.29.0 or later run vllm serve openbmb/MiniCPM5-2B --max-model-len 131072 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser minicpm5, or tool calls come back as XML text
  3. On SGLang 0.5.16 or later add --tool-call-parser minicpm5 --reasoning-parser qwen3; SGLang is OpenBMB's recommended backend for tool calls
  4. Tool calls are XML, <function name=...><param name=...>, not Hermes JSON
  5. Sample with temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and min_p 0.0; llama.cpp's default min_p 0.05 can loop, and repetition_penalty 1.05 helps if it does
  6. Expect a <think> block before every answer and leave room in max_tokens; enable_thinking false is accepted by the template but OpenBMB doesn't support it for the 2B
  7. Validate JSON yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
  8. Use the main repository's template; the GGUF, MLX and GPTQ copies predate the 29 September fix

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Agents-A1-4B or MiniCPM5-2B?

Agents-A1-4B and MiniCPM5-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.2 (C). MiniCPM5-2B leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Agents-A1-4B or MiniCPM5-2B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.