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

Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna M.1

Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna M.1's 55.5 (C), and leads in 3 of 5 scored categories. Laguna M.1 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

Gemma 4 E4B IT B

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 65
  • Risk, 70 against 55
  • Documentation and upkeep, 75 against 36

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 2.5 out of 5

Watch for

No safety evaluation figures published

Laguna M.1 C

Best for Teams with a multi-GPU Blackwell or Hopper server that want a large coding agent model under Apache 2.0.

Ahead on

  • Capability, 46 against 27

Watch for

The smallest build needs about 167 GB, more than a 128 GB machine

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runGemma 4 E4B ITLaguna M.1Edge
Capability35%352746Laguna M.1 +19
Reach25%259565Gemma 4 E4B IT +30
Risk20%207055Gemma 4 E4B IT +15
Agent interface10%108585even
Documentation and upkeep10%107536Gemma 4 E4B IT +39
Negative events≤1500
TotalB 63.2/100C 55.5/100

Facts side by side

FactGemma 4 E4B ITLaguna M.1
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorGoogle DeepMindPoolside
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtyesno
Last release2026-07-202026-07-14
Terms last updatedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno 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 reviews3.5/5 (4)2.5/5 (4)

Verdicts

Gemma 4 E4B 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 7 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 M.1

A large coding and agent cousin under plain Apache 2.0, for agents with a multi-GPU server. Its smallest build needs about 167 GB, more than a 128 GB machine, and no local runtime library packages it. The main risks are no upkeep since July, no hosted fallback shown today, no safety results, and repository code on the SGLang route.

Before you call either

Gemma 4 E4B IT

  1. On the reference machine run llama-server -hf google/gemma-4-E4B-it-qat-q4_0-gguf --hf-file gemma-4-E4B_q4_0-it.gguf --jinja -c 131072, and add --mmproj with gemma-4-E4B-it-mmproj.gguf for images and audio
  2. With Ollama run ollama run gemma4:e4b and raise num_ctx or OLLAMA_CONTEXT_LENGTH, since the default context is small and agents want at least 64K
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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 M.1

  1. Run the NVFP4 build on Blackwell GPUs with vllm serve poolside/Laguna-M.1-NVFP4 --tensor-parallel-size 2 --tool-call-parser poolside_v1 --reasoning-parser poolside_v1 --enable-auto-tool-choice, on vLLM 0.21.0 or later
  2. Thinking is off in the template unless you pass enable_thinking true or start the server with --default-chat-template-kwargs '{"enable_thinking": true}', which Poolside recommends for agentic coding
  3. Pass earlier reasoning back as reasoning_content in the history, since the card says reasoning may stop in later steps if it's dropped
  4. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0 and top_k 20
  5. The FP8 build's Docker image and serve.sh predate upstream support and set a 4,096-token context, so prefer a released vLLM
  6. It doesn't fit our 128 GB reference machine at any published precision
  7. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Gemma 4 E4B IT or Laguna M.1?

Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna M.1's 55.5 (C), and leads in 3 of 5 scored categories. Laguna M.1 leads on capability.

Other comparisons with Gemma 4 E4B IT or Laguna M.1

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.