Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against BigBang-v1's 56.3 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. BigBang-v1 leads on risk. 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 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
- Risk, 55 against 40
Watch for
BF16 is the only build from the publisher, needing about 86 GB
Best for Agents on a laptop, phone or robot that need to read screens, documents, images and video from a model under 2 GB at 4 bits
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 60
- Agent interface, 90 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 46
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself
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.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-VL-2B +31
BigBang-v1 46
Model card 11 of 20, limitations, architecture and a cut-off are missing. Training data 5, a general description of about 10,000 synthetic examples. Last change 15, the card last changed on 6 August 2026, 90 days before this check. Responsiveness 0, no publisher reply to any of 7 questions. Version policy 5, a first release. File health 10, the files agree with the card and the base. 11 + 5 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 46.
LFM3-VL-2B 77
Model card 17, Intended use (questions about video, documents, charts and app screens, finding objects, spatial reasoning), a limitation (not recommended for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning), architecture (language model, 14-layer vision encoder and projector), parameters (1.92B), context (128K) and 16 languages. Training data 5, A general description: the base's 22T tokens of pre-training with the kinds of data added since LFM2, then vision mid-training on image and video data, supervised fine-tuning, vision reinforcement learning and distillation. Last change 20, the last commit, on 9 November 2026, added the OpenVINO checkpoint to the card's inference table, a day before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 5 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 to 31 October 2026), 3 have a reply from a LiquidAI member, which is most. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the lfm3_vl architecture, the 128,000-token context and the vision settings in processor_config.json. 17 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 77.
Agent interface LFM3-VL-2B +30
BigBang-v1 60
Chat template 20, the base's template in the repository. Tool-calling format 10 of 25, the card names the qwen3_coder parser and nothing more. Trained tool calling 20, tuned for tool use with several calls a turn. Structured output 0. Reasoning control 0, the card doesn't say how to turn thinking off or budget it. Context 10, 262,144 tokens. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 60.
LFM3-VL-2B 90
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (12,129 characters), with roles, images and video, tools, deferred tools, tool results and the thinking switch. 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 says its fine-tuning mix included tool calling and agentic traces. Structured output 5, the card's vLLM and SGLang commands set a structured-output backend and its fine-tuning table has a JSON extraction notebook, but nothing says how to ask this model for JSON. Liquid's API guide documents response_format with lfm3-1.7b as its example. Reasoning control 10, Liquid's chat-template page documents enable_thinking=False in apply_chat_template for LFM3, with reasoning on by default inside think tags, and the card documents preserve_thinking and reports a no-thinking configuration in its benchmarks. Context 10, 128K tokens of input and output per the card, and max_position_embeddings 128000 for the language model in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 90.
Reach LFM3-VL-2B +25
BigBang-v1 60
Memory 10 of 30, the only build from the publisher is BF16 at 71.9 GB, 86.3 GB with a fifth added, which fits the reference machine but not 64 GB. Runtimes 25, it keeps the base's qwen3_5_moe architecture, which llama.cpp, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers run in released versions, and Ollama 0.40.14 runs through the llama.cpp build it pins. Builds 0, no quantised build from the publisher. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 like its base. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 0, one inference provider, Featherless AI, where the line needs two. 10 + 25 + 0 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 60.
LFM3-VL-2B 85
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.20 GB projector file, and 1.30 GB × 1.2 = 1.6 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 15, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture and the LFM3-VL projector (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242), Ollama's library has an lfm3-vl entry, and LM Studio's catalogue lists liquid/lfm3-vl-2b. 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-vl-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 85.
Risk BigBang-v1 +15
BigBang-v1 55
File safety 25, safetensors only and nothing from the repository runs. Provenance 15, the files are in the publisher's own organisation with a SHA-256 for every weight file. Safety evaluation 0. Agent guidance 0. Licence risk 15, plain Apache 2.0 that hasn't changed. Security programme 0, no website or security contact. 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 55.
LFM3-VL-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.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | BigBang-v1 | LFM3-VL-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 85 | LFM3-VL-2B +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 40 | BigBang-v1 +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 90 | LFM3-VL-2B +30 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 46 | 77 | LFM3-VL-2B +31 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 56.3/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | BigBang-v1 | LFM3-VL-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | The Endless Frontier (endless-frontier) | 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 | 2026-08-06 | 2026-11-09 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.3/5 (4) | none |
How the scores have moved
LFM3-VL-2B
No score change since it was listed.
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.
LFM3-VL-2B
A 1.92B vision model that reads images and video on an 8 GB machine, with a documented tool-call format and thinking. It runs today in llama.cpp, Ollama and LM Studio, while vLLM and SGLang support is still unreleased. Transformers needs repository code, and there are no safety results, security contact or data sources.
Before you call either
BigBang-v1
- 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 - The card says to keep at least 128K of context so its thinking isn't cut short
- Thinking control isn't documented, try the base template's
enable_thinkingfalse in chat_template_kwargs and check the output - For Ollama or llama.cpp you'll need someone else's GGUF; the publisher ships BF16 safetensors only
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding
LFM3-VL-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-VL-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-vl, with llama.cpp b11960 or later - Use temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition penalty 1.1, per the card
- Video is sampled at 2 frames a second up to 768 frames, and each frame costs context. Video input in llama.cpp needs ffmpeg
- Don't plan on vLLM or SGLang until a release carries LFM3-VL
- Validate JSON output yourself
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, BigBang-v1 or LFM3-VL-2B?
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against BigBang-v1's 56.3 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. BigBang-v1 leads on risk.
Other comparisons with BigBang-v1 or LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs BigBang-v1
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs BigBang-v1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs BigBang-v1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Arete-27B vs BigBang-v1
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Carbon-X
- BigBang-v1 vs Cosmos-Reason2-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- BigBang-v1 vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-5.3
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs gpt-oss-120b
- BigBang-v1 vs gpt-oss-20b
- BigBang-v1 vs Granite 4.2 30B
- BigBang-v1 vs Granite 4.2 3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Granite 4.2 8B
- BigBang-v1 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Hy3
- BigBang-v1 vs Inkling
- BigBang-v1 vs Inkling-Small
- BigBang-v1 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- BigBang-v1 vs Kimi K3
- BigBang-v1 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- BigBang-v1 vs Kolibri-1
- BigBang-v1 vs Kronos
- BigBang-v1 vs Laguna M.1
- BigBang-v1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- BigBang-v1 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-1.7B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- BigBang-v1 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs Mistral Large 4
- BigBang-v1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- BigBang-v1 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- BigBang-v1 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- BigBang-v1 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- BigBang-v1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- BigBang-v1 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- BigBang-v1 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- BigBang-v1 vs occamy-1.0
- BigBang-v1 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- BigBang-v1 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- BigBang-v1 vs SmolLM3-3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- BigBang-v1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- BigBang-v1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- BigBang-v1 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling vs LFM3-VL-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kronos vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-VL-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/bigbang-v1-vs-lfm3-vl-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/bigbang-v1.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm3-vl-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare bigbang-v1 lfm3-vl-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "bigbang-v1", "b": "lfm3-vl-2b"}at/mcp, no key