Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna S 2.1
Laguna S 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against DeepSeek-V3.2's 58.6 (C), and leads in every scored category. 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
Best for Teams with an eight-GPU server who want an MIT agent model with broad runtime support, or agents calling it through a hosted provider
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
689.5 GB of FP8 files and no smaller build from DeepSeek or a runtime library, far beyond 107.4 GB
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 60
- Risk, 55 against 50
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 41 against 34
Watch for
No reply from Poolside to any of 34 discussions, many of them reports about thinking and tool calls
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | DeepSeek-V3.2 | Laguna S 2.1 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 75 | Laguna S 2.1 +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 55 | Laguna S 2.1 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 85 | Laguna S 2.1 +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 34 | 41 | Laguna S 2.1 +7 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 58.6/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | DeepSeek-V3.2 | Laguna S 2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | DeepSeek | Poolside |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | OpenMDW-1.1 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2025-12-01 | 2026-08-19 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | |
| Privacy policy last updated | no 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 reviews | 2.3/5 (4) | 2.3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
DeepSeek-V3.2
DeepSeek-V3.2 is an MIT-licensed reasoning model trained for parallel tool calls, with thinking chosen per request, for long agent work. It needs about 690 GB of FP8 files, eight 80 GB GPUs in vLLM's recipe and prompts built from DeepSeek's Python. The main risk is neglect, with no file changes since December 2025 and no safety evaluation.
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
DeepSeek-V3.2
- Start it with vLLM's recipe, vllm serve deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3.2 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --tokenizer-mode deepseek_v32 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser deepseek_v32 --reasoning-parser deepseek_v3
- It doesn't fit the 107.4 GB reference machine at any qualifying build, so call DeepInfra (deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3.2) or SambaNova (DeepSeek-V3.2) instead
- Outside vLLM, build prompts with encoding/encoding_dsv32.py and wrap parse_message_from_completion_text in error handling, since DeepSeek says it handles well-formed output only
- Pick thinking or chat with thinking_mode, and read the reasoning from reasoning_content
- Send developer messages only for search-agent prompts, the only use DeepSeek gives that role
- Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 and keep prompts within 128K tokens
Laguna S 2.1
- 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 - 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 - 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 - Thinking is on by default in the template, pass
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse to turn it off, and keepreasoning_contentfrom earlier turns - 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 - 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
- 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, DeepSeek-V3.2 or Laguna S 2.1?
Laguna S 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against DeepSeek-V3.2's 58.6 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with DeepSeek-V3.2 or Laguna S 2.1
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Agents-A1-4B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna S 2.1
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- BigBang-v1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs gpt-oss-20b
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Granite 4.2 3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Inkling
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Inkling-Small
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Kimi K3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs SmolLM3-3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Laguna S 2.1
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna S 2.1
- gpt-oss-20b vs Laguna S 2.1
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Hy3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Inkling-Small vs Laguna S 2.1
- Inkling vs Laguna S 2.1
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Laguna S 2.1
- Kimi K3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Kolibri-1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Laguna M.1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Laguna S 2.1 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Laguna S 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/deepseek-v3-2-vs-laguna-s-2-1.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/deepseek-v3-2.json·/api/v1/tools/laguna-s-2-1.json - From a terminal
anchor compare deepseek-v3-2 laguna-s-2-1(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "deepseek-v3-2", "b": "laguna-s-2-1"}at/mcp, no key