Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
Gemma 4 E2B IT scores 60.4 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 55 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. Ling-3.0-tiny leads on capability. 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 90
- Risk, 70 against 50
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 75 against 56
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 2.8 out of 5
Watch for
No safety evaluation figures published
Best for Agents on a laptop or small GPU that want a fast local model for tool calls and short reasoning, under MIT
Ahead on
- Capability, 31 against 19
Watch for
No hosted provider today, and Ollama support is only an unmerged pull request
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Gemma 4 E2B IT | Ling-3.0-tiny | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%35 | 19 | 31 | Ling-3.0-tiny +12 |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 90 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 50 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +20 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 60 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 75 | 56 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +19 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 60.4/100 | C 55/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Gemma 4 E2B IT | Ling-3.0-tiny |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Google DeepMind | inclusionAI (Ant Group) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-08-31 |
| 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 | 3.5/5 (4) | 2.8/5 (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.
Ling-3.0-tiny
A small, quick hybrid reasoning cousin for local agent work, tool calls and coding, under MIT. It runs in about 6 GB from inclusionAI's 4-bit GGUF in released Transformers, vLLM, SGLang and llama.cpp, with no host. The main risks are a card that doesn't match the files in places, the vLLM route running repository code, and no model safety results.
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
Ling-3.0-tiny
- Start it with
llama-server -hf inclusionAI/Ling-3.0-tiny-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja -c 32768, which needs llama.cpp b11772 or a recent release with bailingmoe3 - With vLLM 0.32.0,
vllm serve inclusionAI/Ling-3.0-tiny --trust-remote-code --enable-prefix-caching --mamba-cache-mode align --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser ling3 --reasoning-parser ling3, which runs the repository's config code - With SGLang 0.5.22, its cookbook uses
--reasoning-parser deepseek-r1 --tool-call-parser glm45for this model, and drop the card's NEXTN flags since tiny has no MTP layer - Thinking is on by default, pass
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks - Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 20
- The template keeps earlier reasoning in the prompt, which grows long agent sessions
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
- For a guardrail, inclusionAI's Ling-3.0-tiny-singprobe scores intent, unsafe output and hallucination per token, but only through SGLang and vLLM integration branches
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Gemma 4 E2B IT or Ling-3.0-tiny?
Gemma 4 E2B IT scores 60.4 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 55 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. Ling-3.0-tiny leads on capability.
Other comparisons with Gemma 4 E2B IT or Ling-3.0-tiny
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- 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 S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- 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 Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Inkling-Small vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Inkling vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kimi K3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kolibri-1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/gemma-4-e2b-it-vs-ling-3-0-tiny.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/ling-3-0-tiny.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gemma-4-e2b-it ling-3-0-tiny(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gemma-4-e2b-it", "b": "ling-3-0-tiny"}at/mcp, no key