Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Hy-Memory-30B-A3B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61.5 (C) and 61 (C). Hy-Memory-30B-A3B leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep. 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 a multi-GPU server who want DeepSeek's agent model under MIT, with the hosted API as a fallback.
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 75 against 65
Watch for
510.3 GB of files and no smaller build anywhere, so it won't fit the 107.4 GB reference machine
Best for Agents with an external memory framework that want a local model for the write path on a 24 GB card
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 60
- Risk, 60 against 50
- Documentation and upkeep, 68 against 48
Watch for
Not a general assistant or a tool caller
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 Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +25
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 60
Memory scores nothing, because the only build is DeepSeek's own at 510.3 GB, about 612 GB with the fifth added, and nobody's runtime library holds a smaller one at 4-bit or better. Four runtimes run it in a released version (5 each), vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23, which maps the V4.1 architecture name onto its V4 model, llama.cpp from b11870 (25 October 2026), which added the deepseek41 architecture and its converter, and Ollama 0.40.14, which builds llama.cpp b11963. Transformers 5.22.1 and LM Studio don't (0 each). The release itself is one quantised build, FP8 with FP4 experts (10). MIT with nothing added earns the full terms line (15), the repositories aren't gated (10), and Hugging Face maps three live inference providers for the update (5). 0 + 20 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 5 = 60.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 85
Memory 25, Tencent's own Q4_K_M GGUF is 18.24 GB, and 18.24 GB × 1.2 = 21.9 GB, which fits 24 GB but not 16 GB. Its Q3_K_M file and the two files with experts at 1 or 2 bits are below 4-bit precision and don't count. Runtimes 20, hy_v3 model code in released vLLM (HYV3ForCausalLM in the v0.33.0 registry), SGLang v0.5.23 (hunyuan_v3.py), Transformers v5.22.2 and llama.cpp b12242, 5 each. Builds 15, Tencent publishes an FP8 repository and a GGUF repository with Q4_K_M, Q6_K and Q8_0 files in its own organisation, so quantised builds at two precisions or more. Terms 15, Apache 2.0, with only a preamble naming Tencent as copyright holder above the licence text. Download 10, gated is false for the main, FP8 and GGUF repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account or terms to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face lists no inference provider for the model (an empty provider mapping on 10 November 2026), and the card names no API. 25 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 85.
Documentation and upkeep Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +20
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 48
The cards cover architecture, parameters and context but not intended use, limitations, languages or a cut-off, so 8. Training data is a general description with no cut-off, which caps it at 5. The files changed on 16 and 17 October and DeepSeek's deepseek-recipe 0.2.0 changed the V4.1 prompt encoding on 20 October, inside 30 days (20). None of the 40 most recent questions across both repositories had a DeepSeek reply (0). Every release keeps its own repository and the update names what it replaces (10). File health loses 5 for an open, unanswered pull request saying the September template trails the encoding changes. 8 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 5 = 48.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 68
Model card 8, Intended use (the write path of Mem0, MemOS and Hy-Memory), parameters (30B, about 3B active) and languages (English and Chinese, in the metadata) are there. Training data 5, A general description of the two training stages inside the harnesses, with no datasets, sizes or cut-off. Last change 20, the last commit, on 16 October 2026, added the licence and the card, 25 days before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 4 discussions that aren't pull requests (16 to 30 October 2026), 3 have a reply from a tencent organisation member. Version policy 5, A first release, with nothing replaced. File health 10, Config, tokenizer and template agree on the architecture, the context and the thinking levels. 8 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 68.
Risk Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 50
The weights are safetensors only, but 10 comes off because the card's way to build prompts is running encoding.py from the repository, since there's no Jinja template. The files sit in DeepSeek's own organisation with a hash for every file. Nothing is published on safety and there's no guidance for agent use, so those two lines score 0. The security programme earns 5 for the security@deepseek.com reporting address in DeepSeek's site footer, read as for DeepSeek-V3.2, with no security.txt and no public advisories. The MIT licence carries no use policy, threshold or revocation, so licence risk keeps all 15.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 60
File safety 25, 51 safetensors shards and no pickle or Python files. Provenance 15, files in the tencent organisation that the card's own resource list links to (10), with a SHA-256 listed for all 53 large files (5). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, no prompt-injection guidance, instruction hierarchy, account of trained refusals or general cautions on the card. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 with no use policy, no field-of-use limit, no threshold and no clause letting Tencent change the terms. Security programme 5, Tencent's Security Response Center takes vulnerability reports company-wide with published reward rules, as the Hy3 listing records (5). 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 5 = 60.
Agent interface DeepSeek V4.1 Flash +10
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 75
There's no Jinja template in the 17 October repository, only code to run, so the template line gets 10. DeepSeek documents the DSML tool format both ways and ships its own parser in encoding.py and deepseek-recipe, but names no parser in a runtime (10, read as for DeepSeek-V3.2 and V4-Flash-0731), and one block can carry several calls (20). deepseek-recipe documents JSON Schema output via response_format (15). Thinking turns off in chat mode and takes an effort budget from 1 to 100, with reasoning returned in think tags (10). The 1M context was trained in (10).
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 65
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository. Tool-calling format 10, the card doesn't mention tools. Trained tool calling 10, the template can render tool calls, but the card presents the model as a memory writer that returns memories as text or JSON and says nothing of calling tools. Structured output 5, the card's quickstart asks for a JSON object with a memories list in the system prompt and shows nothing else, no response_format and no schema, so JSON output is shown by example without a documented way to constrain it. Reasoning control 10, the card passes reasoning_effort as no_think per request through chat_template_kwargs, and the template takes high, low or no_think. Context 10, 262,144 tokens native (max_position_embeddings in config.json). 20 + 10 + 10 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 65.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 85 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 60 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 65 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 48 | 68 | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +20 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61.5/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Hy-Memory-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | DeepSeek | Tencent (Hy team) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-17 | 2026-10-16 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | none |
How the scores have moved
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
A large multimodal agent model with a 1M-token context, documented tool calls, JSON Schema output and a reasoning budget, under MIT. It needs about 612 GB of memory across several GPUs and runs in vLLM, SGLang and llama.cpp. The main risks are prompts built from DeepSeek's code instead of a template, no published safety results and no DeepSeek replies.
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
A specialist that writes an agent's long-term memory, built to slot into Mem0, MemOS or Tencent's own framework in place of a general model. It fits a 24 GB card from Tencent's own GGUF, under plain Apache 2.0, and Tencent answers on the repository. Its results are Tencent's own and nobody has rerun them.
Before you call either
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- DeepSeek's reference run is its inference folder, convert.py with --model-parallel 8 --expert-dtype fp4, then torchrun --nproc-per-node 8 generate.py --ckpt-path "$SAVE_PATH" --config config.json --interactive
- In vLLM 0.32.0 the parsers are named deepseek_v41 for both --tool-call-parser and --reasoning-parser. That's vLLM's naming, DeepSeek doesn't document a vLLM command
- In llama.cpp, convert with convert_hf_to_gguf.py from b11870 or later, which added the deepseek41 architecture on 25 October 2026; no GGUF is published by DeepSeek
- Build prompts with encoding.py or pip install deepseek-recipe, not the September repository's chat_template.jinja, which an open pull request says trails the 16 October encoding
- Tool calls come back in a DSML calls block with a space before calls, invoke and parameter, unlike V4
- Set reasoning_effort to 1 to 100, or low, high or max (50, 75, 100), in thinking mode only. Default is 75
- Sample at temperature 1.0 and top_p 1.0 and allow 256K or more output tokens, as the card recommends
- Without the hardware, call DeepSeek's API as deepseek-flash, which serves this exact update
Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Use it as the writer model in Mem0, MemOS or Hy-Memory, not as the model that answers the user
- Start it with
llama-server -hf tencent/Hy-Memory-30B-A3B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, or with vLLM under the served name hy-memory as the card does - Pass
reasoning_effortas no_think inchat_template_kwargsand temperature 0, as the card's example does - Ask for a JSON object in the system prompt and validate it yourself, since no schema constraint is documented
- Treat what it stores as unverified. It keeps what a conversation says, true or not
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Hy-Memory-30B-A3B?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Hy-Memory-30B-A3B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61.5 (C) and 61 (C). Hy-Memory-30B-A3B leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Arete-27B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Arete-27B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Carbon-X vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Carbon-X vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs gpt-oss-20b
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Granite 4.2 30B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Granite 4.2 3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Granite 4.2 8B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Hy3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Inkling
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Inkling-Small
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kimi K3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kronos
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna XS 2.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-1.7B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.7
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Mistral Large 4
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-4B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ripple-65B Preview
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs SmolLM3-3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Hy3
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Inkling
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Inkling-Small
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kimi K3
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kolibri-1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kronos
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Laguna M.1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LBS-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Mistral Large 4
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-vs-hy-memory-30b-a3b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/deepseek-v4-1-flash.json·/api/v1/tools/hy-memory-30b-a3b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare deepseek-v4-1-flash hy-memory-30b-a3b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "deepseek-v4-1-flash", "b": "hy-memory-30b-a3b"}at/mcp, no key