Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 scores 62.4 (B) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 5 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach 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 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents or teams with a multi-GPU server, or a provider account, who want DeepSeek's V4 agent model under MIT with a 1M context
Ahead on
- Capability, 66 against 13
Watch for
The smallest 4-bit build is 156.4 GB, so it needs about 188 GB and doesn't fit a 128 GB machine
Best for Agents that want a small local helper for tool calls, extraction and RAG on a laptop, phone or CPU, at organisations under the licence's revenue threshold
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 57 against 43
Watch for
Commercial use isn't licensed for organisations with $10M or more of annual revenue
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 | LFM2.5-2.6B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%35 | 66 | 13 | DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 +53 |
| Reach | 25%25 | 70 | 95 | LFM2.5-2.6B +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 50 | even |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 75 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 43 | 57 | LFM2.5-2.6B +14 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 62.4/100 | D 51.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 | LFM2.5-2.6B |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 2026-07-31 | 2026-09-22 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 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 | 2.5/5 (4) | 2.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
A long-context agent cousin under MIT with documented tool calls, three reasoning effort levels and support in every major runtime but Ollama. It needs about 190 to 200 GB of memory, though six inference providers serve it. The main risks are prompts built from DeepSeek's Python, no published safety results and no answers in its repository.
LFM2.5-2.6B
A small, fast cousin for tool calls, extraction and long-context steps on a laptop or phone. Liquid's own 4-bit build is 1.6 GB, and every common runtime runs it. It always thinks, isn't meant for coding or knowledge-heavy work, and organisations over $10M of revenue need another licence. There are no safety results or security contact.
Before you call either
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- vllm serve deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 --trust-remote-code --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --block-size 256 --data-parallel-size 4 --enable-expert-parallel --moe-backend deep_gemm_mega_moe --attention-config '{"use_fp4_indexer_cache": true}' --speculative-config '{"method":"dspark","num_speculative_tokens":7,"draft_sample_method":"greedy"}' --tokenizer-mode deepseek_v4 --tool-call-parser deepseek_v4 --enable-auto-tool-choice --reasoning-parser deepseek_v4 (the card's 4x GB300 example plus the parser flags from vLLM's recipe)
- Build prompts with encoding_dsv4.py, deepseek-recipe's V4 encoder or vLLM's --tokenizer-mode deepseek_v4, since the repository has no Jinja template
- Tool calls come back in a DSML tool_calls block with invoke elements, string parameters carry string="true" and JSON values string="false"
- Set temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 for agent work, and allow up to 384K output tokens at reasoning effort high or max
- Without the hardware, call it through a Hugging Face inference provider (Together, DeepInfra, Novita, Baseten, Scaleway, Featherless), not DeepSeek's API, where deepseek-v4-flash now means V4.1 Flash
- LM Studio's library build is a 156.4 GB MXFP4 GGUF and LM Studio states 156 GB minimum system memory
LFM2.5-2.6B
- Quickest start is
ollama run LiquidAI/lfm2.5-2.6b, 1.7 GB, orllama-cli -hf LiquidAI/LFM2.5-2.6B-GGUF - With vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser lfm2; for vLLM add--reasoning-parser qwen3so the thinking comes back separately - Sample at temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition_penalty 1.1, as the card and generation_config.json set
- Put tools in the system prompt as
List of tools: [...]JSON, or pass tools to apply_chat_template; calls come back as a Python list of function calls, and the system prompt can ask for JSON calls instead - Leave max_tokens unset or generous, since a low cap cuts the reasoning off mid-thought
- Earlier thinking is dropped from the prompt unless
preserve_thinkingis true - Liquid's 328M LFM2.5-2.6B-DSpark drafter speeds decoding about 2.6 times in SGLang and on Apple silicon, per Liquid
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 or LFM2.5-2.6B?
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 scores 62.4 (B) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 5 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 or LFM2.5-2.6B
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs gpt-oss-20b
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Granite 4.2 3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Inkling
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Inkling-Small
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Kimi K3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs SmolLM3-3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Inkling vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/deepseek-v4-flash-0731-vs-lfm2-5-2-6b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/deepseek-v4-flash-0731.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm2-5-2-6b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare deepseek-v4-flash-0731 lfm2-5-2-6b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "deepseek-v4-flash-0731", "b": "lfm2-5-2-6b"}at/mcp, no key