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

BigBang-v1 vs Laguna S 2.1

Laguna S 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against BigBang-v1's 54.4 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. BigBang-v1 leads on 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

BigBang-v1 C

Best for Agents with 96 GB or more that want an Apache 2.0 mixture-of-experts model tuned for research, search and coding, and can do without publisher support.

Ahead on

  • Documentation and upkeep, 46 against 41

Watch for

BF16 is the only build from the publisher, needing about 86 GB

Laguna S 2.1 C

Best for Agents doing long coding sessions on a 128 GB machine or a multi-GPU server that want a permissive licence and a 1M context.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 75 against 55
  • Agent interface, 85 against 60

Watch for

No reply from Poolside to any of 34 discussions, many of them reports about thinking and tool calls

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runBigBang-v1Laguna S 2.1Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%255575Laguna S 2.1 +20
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%106085Laguna S 2.1 +25
Documentation and upkeep10%104641BigBang-v1 +5
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 54.4/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactBigBang-v1Laguna S 2.1
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorThe Endless Frontier (endless-frontier)Poolside
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0OpenMDW-1.1
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-08-062026-08-19
Terms last updatedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno 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 reviews2.3/5 (4)2.3/5 (4)

Verdicts

BigBang-v1

A Qwen3.6-35B-A3B fine-tuned on synthetic research problems, under plain Apache 2.0, for search, science and coding work. The publisher ships BF16 only, about 86 GB to run, and has no report, safety results or replies to questions, so smaller builds and support come from others.

Laguna S 2.1

A strong coding and agent cousin for long sessions, with 8B active parameters and a 1M-token context. At 4-bit it needs a 96 to 128 GB machine, tight on a 128 GB one. The main risks are that nobody at Poolside answers its many reports, there are no safety results, and a build card misdescribes its file.

Before you call either

BigBang-v1

  1. On the reference machine use vllm serve endless-frontier/BigBang-v1 --max-model-len 131072 --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder
  2. The card says to keep at least 128K of context so its thinking isn't cut short
  3. Thinking control isn't documented, try the base template's enable_thinking false in chat_template_kwargs and check the output
  4. For a smaller build you'll need someone else's quantisation, the publisher has none
  5. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding

Laguna S 2.1

  1. Quickest start is ollama run laguna-s-2.1, 96 GB for the default Q4_K_M, or the 66 GB nvfp4 tag on Apple Silicon
  2. On our reference machine try llama-server -hf poolside/Laguna-S-2.1-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja -c 65536, from a llama.cpp release with the laguna architecture (b11772 has it). The 96 GB file leaves little room for context in 107.4 GB
  3. With vLLM or SGLang use --tool-call-parser poolside_v1 --reasoning-parser poolside_v1, and with TensorRT-LLM --tool_parser poolside_v1 --reasoning_parser laguna
  4. Thinking is on by default in the template, pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false to turn it off, and keep reasoning_content from earlier turns
  5. The GGUFs ship set to 262,144 tokens. For 1M with llama.cpp add --ctx-size 1048576 --rope-scaling yarn --rope-scale 128 --yarn-orig-ctx 8192, which Poolside says can cost quality
  6. Sampling per the generation config is temperature 1.0 and top_k 20, and Poolside suggests temperature 0.7 and top_p 0.95 at 1M
  7. Expect occasional tool-schema slips in harnesses unlike Poolside's own, and validate JSON arguments, which Poolside lists as known limitations

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, BigBang-v1 or Laguna S 2.1?

Laguna S 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against BigBang-v1's 54.4 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. BigBang-v1 leads on documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with BigBang-v1 or Laguna S 2.1

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.