Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
Laguna S 2.1 and Gemma 4 E2B IT score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.4 (C). Gemma 4 E2B IT 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 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents that need a cheap, permissively licensed helper on 8 GB of memory, for tool calls, short audio or images, rather than hard reasoning
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 75
- Risk, 70 against 55
- Documentation and upkeep, 75 against 41
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 2.3 out of 5
Watch for
No safety evaluation figures published
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.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
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 | Gemma 4 E2B IT | Laguna S 2.1 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 75 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 55 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 85 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 75 | 41 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +34 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 60.4/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Gemma 4 E2B IT | Laguna S 2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Google DeepMind | Poolside |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | OpenMDW-1.1 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 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 | 3.5/5 (4) | 2.3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Gemma 4 E2B IT
A small cousin for light agent work, tool-calling loops, transcription and image reading on a phone or laptop, under Apache 2.0. Google's 4-bit build needs about 5 GB with working space and runs in all the common runtimes. Google's card puts it far below larger Gemma 4 sizes on agent and coding tasks, with no published safety results.
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
Gemma 4 E2B IT
- On the reference machine run
llama-server -hf google/gemma-4-E2B-it-qat-q4_0-gguf --hf-file gemma-4-E2B_q4_0-it.gguf --jinja -c 131072, and add--mmprojwith gemma-4-E2B-it-mmproj.gguf for images and audio - With Ollama run
ollama run gemma4:e2band raise num_ctx or OLLAMA_CONTEXT_LENGTH, since the default context is small and agents want at least 64K - In vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser gemma4 --reasoning-parser gemma4(vLLM also--enable-auto-tool-choice), or tool calls come back as text; Google's w4a16 build is the 4-bit route there - Thinking is off by default; pass enable_thinking=True or start the system prompt with <|think|>, and drop earlier turns' thinking from history except on tool-call turns
- Put images before the text and audio after it, keep audio to 30 seconds and video to 60 frames, and validate tool names and arguments before running them
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, Gemma 4 E2B IT or Laguna S 2.1?
Laguna S 2.1 and Gemma 4 E2B IT score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.4 (C). Gemma 4 E2B IT leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with Gemma 4 E2B IT or Laguna S 2.1
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna S 2.1
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Laguna S 2.1
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs gpt-oss-20b
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Inkling-Small
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kimi K3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs SmolLM3-3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- 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/gemma-4-e2b-it-vs-laguna-s-2-1.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/gemma-4-e2b-it.json·/api/v1/tools/laguna-s-2-1.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gemma-4-e2b-it laguna-s-2-1(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gemma-4-e2b-it", "b": "laguna-s-2-1"}at/mcp, no key