Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 55 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. 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
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
No hosted provider today, and Ollama support is only an unmerged pull request
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Gemma 4 E4B IT | Ling-3.0-tiny | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%35 | 27 | 31 | Ling-3.0-tiny +4 |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 90 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 50 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +20 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 60 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 75 | 56 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +19 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 63.2/100 | C 55/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Gemma 4 E4B 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 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.
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 E4B IT
- 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--mmprojwith gemma-4-E4B-it-mmproj.gguf for images and audio - With Ollama run
ollama run gemma4:e4band 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 E4B IT or Ling-3.0-tiny?
Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 55 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories.
Other comparisons with Gemma 4 E4B IT or Ling-3.0-tiny
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs gpt-oss-20b
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Inkling-Small
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Kimi K3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs SmolLM3-3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- 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-e4b-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-e4b-it.json·/api/v1/tools/ling-3-0-tiny.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gemma-4-e4b-it ling-3-0-tiny(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gemma-4-e4b-it", "b": "ling-3-0-tiny"}at/mcp, no key