Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
LFM3-Audio-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against DeepSeek-V3.2's 58.6 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. DeepSeek-V3.2 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 Teams with an eight-GPU server who want an MIT agent model with broad runtime support, or agents calling it through a hosted provider
Ahead on
- Risk, 50 against 40
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 Voice agents on a laptop or phone that need speech in, speech out and tool calls from one small model
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 60
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 52 against 34
Watch for
Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release, though the card lists vLLM and SGLang
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.
Agent interface LFM3-Audio-2B +25
DeepSeek-V3.2 60
The chat template earns 10, as the format exists only as Python code to run. The tool-calling format earns 10 because DeepSeek documents the DSML format in code but names no runtime parser, which only vLLM's own recipe does. Trained tool calling earns the full 20 for several calls in one block. Structured output earns nothing, as JSON output isn't documented. Reasoning control earns 10 for thinking or chat mode per request with reasoning_content returned. Context earns 10 for 128K trained tokens.
LFM3-Audio-2B 85
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (9,328 characters), with roles, audio, tools, deferred tools and tool results. 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 names turning spoken requests into tool calls as one of its four uses. Structured output 5, the card says the model is designed for structured outputs without saying how to ask for JSON. Liquid's API guide documents response_format with lfm3-1.7b as its example. Reasoning control 10, the card documents reasoning per request for text replies: the caller prefills the assistant turn with an open think tag to let the model reason, or a closed one for a direct answer, with a use_thinking example. Context 5, 32K tokens of input and output per the card. 20 + 25 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 5 = 85.
Reach LFM3-Audio-2B +20
DeepSeek-V3.2 60
Memory earns nothing, because the only build from DeepSeek or a runtime's library is the 689.5 GB FP8 release, which needs about 827 GB with the fifth added. Runtimes earn the full 25 for released model code in vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp and Transformers, and for Ollama 0.40.14, whose llama.cpp pin (b11963) carries the deepseek32 architecture with no gate in Ollama's server code, though its library entry stays retired; nothing from LM Studio. Builds earn 10 for the single FP8 precision DeepSeek publishes. Terms earn the full 15 for MIT with nothing added, and download the full 10 since the repository isn't gated. Hosted earns nothing, since DeepSeek's own API moved to V4 on 24 April 2026 and Hugging Face maps only DeepInfra as live for it on 4 November (Novita and Featherless in error), where the line needs two providers. Fireworks' model page says Serverless Not Supported and lists it only for on-demand deployment on dedicated GPUs, which is renting the hardware rather than calling a served model.
LFM3-Audio-2B 80
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.17 GB projector file, and 1.27 GB × 1.2 = 1.5 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 10, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture with the LFM3 audio projector and speech output (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242, with a realtime client example that starts this model), and Ollama's library has an lfm3-audio entry. 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-audio-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 80.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-Audio-2B +18
DeepSeek-V3.2 34
The model card earns 14 when read with DeepSeek's own V3.2 model card PDF, which adds intended use and a parameter count, leaving languages and a knowledge cut-off missing. Training data earns 5, a general description with no cut-off. Last change earns 5, as nothing in the repository has changed since 1 December 2025 (338 days on 4 November) and DeepSeek's deepseek-recipe has no V3.2 code. Responsiveness earns nothing, with no reply from a deepseek-ai member in any of the 40 most recent discussions. Version policy earns 5 for earlier versions kept apart without dated notes. File health earns 5 because loading and parsing reports wait without a reply.
LFM3-Audio-2B 52
Model card 17, Intended use (local agents, tool calling, structured outputs, fine-tuning), limitations (not recommended for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning, voice chat in English only), an architecture section, parameters (2B), context (32K) and 19 speech languages and locales. Training data 5, the card has no training section. Last change 20, the last commit, on 3 November 2026, changed the card's navigation icons, seven days before this check, and the one before it, on 31 October, edited the card. Responsiveness 0, Neither of the 2 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 and 31 October 2026) has a reply from a LiquidAI member. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 5, the card gives a 32K context while config.json gives the language model 128,000 positions and Liquid's API lists 128,000 for the hosted model, so the card and the files don't agree on context. 17 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 52.
Risk DeepSeek-V3.2 +10
DeepSeek-V3.2 50
File safety earns 15, safetensors only but 10 off because prompts are built by running DeepSeek's Python from the repository. Provenance earns the full 15 for the deepseek-ai organisation and a SHA-256 on every shard. Safety evaluation earns nothing, since no results are published anywhere. Agent guidance earns nothing, since the notes about the parser and the developer role are usage notes, read alike for all three DeepSeek listings. Licence risk keeps the full 15 for plain MIT. The security programme earns 5 for the security@deepseek.com reporting address on DeepSeek's site, with no public advisories.
LFM3-Audio-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 | DeepSeek-V3.2 | LFM3-Audio-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 80 | LFM3-Audio-2B +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 40 | DeepSeek-V3.2 +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 85 | LFM3-Audio-2B +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 34 | 52 | LFM3-Audio-2B +18 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 58.6/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | DeepSeek-V3.2 | LFM3-Audio-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | DeepSeek | Liquid AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2025-12-01 | 2026-11-03 |
| 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 |
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.
LFM3-Audio-2B
A 2B model that listens and speaks on an 8 GB machine, transcribes and translates 19 languages and turns spoken requests into tool calls. Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release. The context is 32K, voice chat is English only, Liquid hasn't answered the repository's questions, and there are no safety results or data sources.
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 deploy it on Fireworks 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
LFM3-Audio-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-Audio-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-audio - llama.cpp ships examples/realtime_client.py for live speech with this model
- Prefill the assistant turn with an open think tag to let it reason before a text reply
- The context is 32K
- Voice chat is English only, while transcription, synthesis and translation cover 19 languages and locales
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, DeepSeek-V3.2 or LFM3-Audio-2B?
LFM3-Audio-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against DeepSeek-V3.2's 58.6 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. DeepSeek-V3.2 leads on risk.
Other comparisons with DeepSeek-V3.2 or LFM3-Audio-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Arete-27B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Carbon-X vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- 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 30B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Granite 4.2 3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Granite 4.2 8B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- 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 Kimi K3.1 Pro
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Kronos
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-1.7B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Mistral Large 4
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- 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-1.5-122B
- 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 Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- 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 Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- 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-V3.2 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Inkling vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Kronos vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/deepseek-v3-2-vs-lfm3-audio-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/deepseek-v3-2.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm3-audio-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare deepseek-v3-2 lfm3-audio-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "deepseek-v3-2", "b": "lfm3-audio-2b"}at/mcp, no key