Sign in

Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B

EXAONE 4.5 33B and Nanbeige4.3-33B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.8 (C). Nanbeige4.3-33B 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 6359 open weights comparisons

EXAONE 4.5 33BLG AI Research · Open-weight model C61/100#61 of 160 open-weight models Nanbeige4.3-33BNanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) · Open-weight model C60.8/100#86 of 160 open-weight models

Which one, for what

EXAONE 4.5 33B C

Best for Researchers and students working on documents, Korean or multimodal agents who don't need commercial rights

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

Research and education only. No commercial use of the model or its output

Nanbeige4.3-33B C

Best for Agents with a 32 GB GPU (INT4) or more, or the 128 GB reference machine at BF16, that want an Apache-tagged 33B model for long coding and tool loops.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 80 against 65
  • Risk, 60 against 50
  • Documentation and upkeep, 56 against 50

Watch for

Independent results so far are Artificial Analysis's alone (Intelligence Index v5.0 20.4, Terminal-Bench 4.0 29.8 per cent); the card's other agentic numbers are Nanbeige's own runs

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 Nanbeige4.3-33B +15

EXAONE 4.5 33B 65

Memory 20, the smallest build at 4 bits is LG's IQ4_XS GGUF, 18.03 GB with the 2.57 GB projector, and 20.60 GB × 1.2 = 24.7 GB, within 32 GB. Without the projector, for text only, it would fit 24 GB. Runtimes 15, Released vLLM 0.33.0 has exaone4_5.py, Transformers 5.22.2 has the exaone4_5 model, and llama.cpp b12242 has the architecture, with LG's own GGUF. Three at 5 each. Builds 15, LG publishes GGUF at five quantised precisions, an AWQ build and an FP8 build. Terms 5, Research and educational use only. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for all four repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and no click-through, though the licence says downloading is acceptance. Hosted 0, Hugging Face maps no inference provider to it, and the card names no API that serves it. 20 + 15 + 15 + 5 + 10 + 0 = 65.

Nanbeige4.3-33B 80

Memory earns 20, since Nanbeige's INT4 build is 22.57 GB, about 27 GB with a fifth added, which fits 32 GB. Runtimes earn 20 from released vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp, which all run the Llama architecture, and Ollama and LM Studio have no build. Builds earn 15 for Nanbeige's INT4, INT8 and FP8 builds of 31 October 2026. Terms earn 15 for Apache 2.0 with nothing added, though only the metadata names it. Download earns 10, with no gate. Hosted earns 0, as no provider or Nanbeige API serves it.

Risk Nanbeige4.3-33B +10

EXAONE 4.5 33B 50

File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository. Provenance 15, the files sit in the LGAI-EXAONE organisation (LG AI Research on the Hub), which the card's GitHub repository shares a name with and the licence in the repository is LG's (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 5, General cautions: the limitation section lists inappropriate, biased, incorrect and outdated answers and tells users not to try to induce harmful output. Licence risk 5, 15 less 5 for field-of-use limits beyond the law (no commercial use, no building competing models) and 5 for terms the licensor can change or revoke (LG may amend the agreement at any time, and the licence is revocable). Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card beyond a support contact, and www.lgresearch.ai has no security.txt. 25 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 5 + 0 = 50.

Nanbeige4.3-33B 60

File safety earns 25, safetensors only and no repository code, so the card's trust_remote_code has nothing to run. Provenance earns 15, the lab's own organisation as its arXiv report links it, with a hash for every file. Safety evaluation earns 0 and agent guidance 0, since neither card says anything on either. Licence risk keeps all 15 under Apache 2.0. The security programme earns 5 for BOSS Zhipin's security response centre, which isn't linked to the model.

Documentation and upkeep Nanbeige4.3-33B +6

EXAONE 4.5 33B 50

Model card 20, Uses (the quickstart's question answering, document and agent examples), limitations, the architecture, the parameters, the context, the languages (in the metadata) and a knowledge cut-off of December 2024 are all on the card. Training data 5, A knowledge cut-off and one line on excluding personal, harmful and biased content, with no sources or sizes. Last change 10, the main repository last changed on 6 July 2026 (dependencies moved to official releases), 127 days before this check, and the FP8 repository on 9 August, 93 days. Responsiveness 0, none of the 5 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (13 April to 4 May 2026) has a reply from an LGAI-EXAONE member, counted on 10 November by author flags and dates with a script, text not read. Version policy 5, EXAONE 4.0 and 4.0.1 stay in their own repositories and 4.5 came out in new ones, with no dated note on the older cards that we read. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the 262,144 tokens, and a July commit moved the dependencies to released versions. 20 + 5 + 10 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 50.

Nanbeige4.3-33B 56

The model card earns 11, with intended use, parameters, context and languages but no limitations, architecture or cut-off. Training data earns 0, as nothing describes it. Last change earns 20 for the quantised builds of 31 October 2026. Responsiveness earns 10, a Nanbeige member answering nine of 30 discussions. Version policy earns 5 for a first release, with a config change made and reverted under bare commit titles. File health earns 10, the files and the card agreeing.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runEXAONE 4.5 33BNanbeige4.3-33BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%256580Nanbeige4.3-33B +15
Risk20%205060Nanbeige4.3-33B +10
Agent interface10%108585even
Documentation and upkeep10%105056Nanbeige4.3-33B +6
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 60.8/100

Facts side by side

FactEXAONE 4.5 33BNanbeige4.3-33B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorLG AI ResearchNanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceEXAONE AI Model License Agreement 1.2 - NC (research and education only)Apache-2.0 (Hub metadata only; the repository has no LICENSE file)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-062026-10-31
Terms last updatednot read yetno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked

How the scores have moved

EXAONE 4.5 33B

No score change since it was listed.

Nanbeige4.3-33B

Verdicts

EXAONE 4.5 33B

A well-documented vision-language model with a full set of builds, tool calling, switchable reasoning, a 256K context and a stated knowledge cut-off. The licence decides whether you can use it: research and education only, output included, and LG can change the terms. Nothing answered on the repository and no safety results.

Nanbeige4.3-33B

A dense 33B Llama-architecture cousin for long agentic coding and office tasks, with per-request thinking, XML tool calls that stock vLLM and SGLang parse, and 512K of context. Nanbeige's INT4 build needs about 27 GB. Artificial Analysis's first independent runs give it 20.4 on its Intelligence Index, and there are no safety results, training data notes or licence file.

Before you call either

EXAONE 4.5 33B

  1. Don't use it, or anything it writes, commercially. The licence covers the output too
  2. Serve it with vLLM and --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser hermes
  3. Set enable_thinking false for a direct answer. Thinking is on by default
  4. Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and presence_penalty 1.5 in general, and temperature 0.6 with top_k 20 for documents and Korean
  5. For llama.cpp, load a projector file from LG's GGUF repository with the weights for image input
  6. Its knowledge stops at December 2024

Nanbeige4.3-33B

  1. Serve with vllm serve Nanbeige/Nanbeige4.3-33B --enable-auto-tool-choice --reasoning-parser qwen3 --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, as the card says, or SGLang with the same two parsers
  2. On a 32 GB GPU use Nanbeige/Nanbeige4.3-33B-INT4 with the same vLLM or SGLang flags; the INT8 and FP8 builds need about 43 GB
  3. Keep tool_call_format at its default xml, since qwen3_coder parses that format; the json option writes Hermes-style JSON calls, which need a different parser such as vLLM's hermes
  4. Pass chat_template_kwargs {"preserve_thinking": true} for multi-turn tool use and coding, and {"enable_thinking": false} to skip reasoning, as the card recommends
  5. Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and up to 65,536 new tokens for agent work, and temperature 0.6 for reasoning and chat, per the card
  6. Send your own system prompt, since without one the template injects a Chinese identity line, or a Chinese tool-expert prompt when tools are passed
  7. Send one system message at the start only, as the template raises an error for a later one
  8. In plain Transformers pass use_cache=True to generate, since config.json and generation_config.json set it false; trust_remote_code isn't needed

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, EXAONE 4.5 33B or Nanbeige4.3-33B?

EXAONE 4.5 33B and Nanbeige4.3-33B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.8 (C). Nanbeige4.3-33B leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with EXAONE 4.5 33B or Nanbeige4.3-33B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.

Get an auditSee a sample report