Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
BigBang-v1 vs LongCat-2.5
BigBang-v1 scores 56.3 (C) on agent readiness against LongCat-2.5's 50.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. LongCat-2.5 leads on risk and agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 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
- Reach, 60 against 35
Watch for
BF16 is the only build from the publisher, needing about 86 GB
Best for Operators with NPU clusters, and anyone tracking what the open flagships can do
Ahead on
- Risk, 60 against 55
- Agent interface, 75 against 60
Watch for
3,562 GB in BF16 and 1,336 GB at 4 bits
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.
Reach BigBang-v1 +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.
LongCat-2.5 35
Memory 0, the smallest build is Meituan's W4A4 repository, 1,336 GB, and 1,336 GB × 1.2 = 1,603 GB, far above 256 GB. The BF16 files are 3,562 GB. Runtimes 0, none of the six runs it in a released version: vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23, Transformers 5.22.2 and llama.cpp b12242 have no LongcatCausalLM or pro_v code, and the model code config.json names isn't in the repository. Builds 10, one quantised build from Meituan, the W4A4 repository (4-bit experts, 1,336 GB). Terms 15, MIT in the metadata, the LICENSE file and the card, with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for both repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face maps no inference provider to it. 0 + 0 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 35.
Agent interface LongCat-2.5 +15
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.
LongCat-2.5 75
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (11,823 characters), with a copy in tokenizer_config.json. Tool-calling format 25, the card documents how tools are declared (the OpenAI function format) and how calls come back (tool_calls with an id, a name and JSON arguments, answered by a tool message), in a worked example against an OpenAI-compatible server. Trained tool calling 10, the card describes reinforcement learning on long agentic tasks and shows one tool call in a turn. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained output. Reasoning control 10, enable_thinking on or off per request through chat_template_kwargs, with the reasoning returned as reasoning_content, both shown on the card. Context 10, the card states no context length, but config.json gives 524,288 positions and the card's own evaluations ran at 512K and 1M sequence lengths after what it calls long-context training, so 128K or more is taken as trained. 20 + 25 + 10 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 75.
Risk LongCat-2.5 +5
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.
LongCat-2.5 60
File safety 25, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository. Provenance 15, the files sit in the meituan-longcat organisation, the name of Meituan's GitHub organisation that the card links for deployment, and the card's licence names Meituan (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 5, General cautions under Usage Considerations: not evaluated for every use, assess accuracy, safety and fairness before sensitive use, and follow the law. Licence risk 15, MIT with no use policy, no threshold and no right to change the terms. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card beyond a general contact, and Meituan's own security pages weren't looked up, so this scores as absent and is an open question. 25 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 15 + 0 = 60.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | BigBang-v1 | LongCat-2.5 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 35 | BigBang-v1 +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 60 | LongCat-2.5 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 75 | LongCat-2.5 +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 46 | 46 | even |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 56.3/100 | D 50.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | BigBang-v1 | LongCat-2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | The Endless Frontier (endless-frontier) | Meituan (LongCat) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-08-06 | 2026-11-10 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | not read yet |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.3/5 (4) | none |
How the scores have moved
LongCat-2.5
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.
LongCat-2.5
Meituan's flagship is MIT-licensed and documented for tool calling and switchable reasoning, with strong numbers of its own on agentic coding. Almost nobody can run it: 3,562 GB of weights, a 1,336 GB 4-bit build for NPU accelerators, and no released runtime with its architecture. A model to watch until a runtime or a provider picks it up.
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
LongCat-2.5
- You can't run this on a workstation or a single GPU server. Plan for a provider, and none serves it yet
- If an operator serves it, call it as an OpenAI-compatible chat API with tools in the function format
- Pass
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingtrue or false - With thinking on, keep earlier reasoning in the history (
save_history_reasoning_contenttrue), as the card recommends - The card's results use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95
- Its benchmark table is Meituan's own. The unmarked scores are in-house
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, BigBang-v1 or LongCat-2.5?
BigBang-v1 scores 56.3 (C) on agent readiness against LongCat-2.5's 50.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. LongCat-2.5 leads on risk and agent interface.
Other comparisons with BigBang-v1 or LongCat-2.5
- Agents-A1-4B vs BigBang-v1
- Agents-A1-4B vs LongCat-2.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs BigBang-v1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LongCat-2.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs BigBang-v1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LongCat-2.5
- Arete-27B vs BigBang-v1
- Arete-27B vs LongCat-2.5
- BigBang-v1 vs Carbon-X
- BigBang-v1 vs Cola2
- 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 Devstral Small 2
- BigBang-v1 vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs EXAONE 4.5 33B
- 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 LFM3-VL-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 MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- 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 Nanbeige4.2-3B
- 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 North Mini Code 1.0
- 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 OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- 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 SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- BigBang-v1 vs SmolLM3-3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- BigBang-v1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- 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
- BigBang-v1 vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- BigBang-v1 vs ZAYA1-8B
- Carbon-X vs LongCat-2.5
- Cola2 vs LongCat-2.5
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LongCat-2.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LongCat-2.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LongCat-2.5
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LongCat-2.5
- Devstral Small 2 vs LongCat-2.5
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-5.3 vs LongCat-2.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs LongCat-2.5
- gpt-oss-20b vs LongCat-2.5
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LongCat-2.5
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LongCat-2.5
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LongCat-2.5
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LongCat-2.5
- Hy3 vs LongCat-2.5
- Inkling-Small vs LongCat-2.5
- Inkling vs LongCat-2.5
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LongCat-2.5
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LongCat-2.5
- Kimi K3 vs LongCat-2.5
- Kolibri-1 vs LongCat-2.5
- Kronos vs LongCat-2.5
- Laguna M.1 vs LongCat-2.5
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LongCat-2.5
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LongCat-2.5
- LBS-27B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-1.7B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs LongCat-2.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs LongCat-2.5
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LongCat-2.5 vs Mistral Large 4
- LongCat-2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LongCat-2.5 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LongCat-2.5 vs North Mini Code 1.0
- LongCat-2.5 vs occamy-1.0
- LongCat-2.5 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LongCat-2.5 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LongCat-2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LongCat-2.5 vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- LongCat-2.5 vs SmolLM3-3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LongCat-2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LongCat-2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LongCat-2.5 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- LongCat-2.5 vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- LongCat-2.5 vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs ZAYA1-8B
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/bigbang-v1-vs-longcat-2-5.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/bigbang-v1.json·/api/v1/tools/longcat-2-5.json - From a terminal
anchor compare bigbang-v1 longcat-2-5(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "bigbang-v1", "b": "longcat-2-5"}at/mcp, no key