Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-4.5-Air vs LBS-27B
GLM-4.5-Air scores 59.1 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3504 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents with two to four datacentre GPUs, or a provider account, who want a permissively licensed English and Chinese tool-calling model with wide runtime support.
Ahead on
- Reach, 65 against 55
- Risk, 65 against 50
- Agent interface, 85 against 70
Watch for
Z.ai's smallest build is FP8 at about 135 GB in use, with no 4-bit build of its own
LBS-27B D
Best for Agents with about 96 GB of GPU memory that need to find click targets on dense professional screenshots, or read fine detail in large images, and can run a small crop loop and wait for independent results.
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 43 against 38
Watch for
No independent benchmark result yet; ScreenSpot-Pro, OS-World-G, PerceptionBench and HR-Bench numbers are inclusionAI's own runs
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-4.5-Air | LBS-27B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 65 | 55 | GLM-4.5-Air +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 65 | 50 | GLM-4.5-Air +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 70 | GLM-4.5-Air +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 38 | 43 | LBS-27B +5 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 59.1/100 | D 53.9/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-4.5-Air | LBS-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | inclusionAI (Ant Group) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 (the card's metadata and licence section; the LICENSE file sits in the GitHub repository inclusionAI/UI-Venus on its LBS branch, not in the Hugging Face repository) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2025-08-11 | 2026-10-26 |
| 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 | 2.8/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
GLM-4.5-Air
An English and Chinese cousin for agent, coding and tool-calling work, with switchable thinking and wide runtime support. It needs about 135 GB for Z.ai's FP8 build, two to four H100s by Z.ai's figures, and Z.ai and Novita host it. The main risk is age, with files from August 2025 and no answers from Z.ai since.
LBS-27B
A 27B Qwen3.8 fine-tune for GUI grounding that zooms into screenshots over a few turns before naming a point, and inclusionAI says it also helps with fine detail in large images. It needs about 96 GB at BF16 and a client that runs its crop actions. Every result so far is inclusionAI's own, with no safety results or injection guidance.
Before you call either
GLM-4.5-Air
- Z.ai's FP8 recipe is
python3 -m sglang.launch_server --model-path zai-org/GLM-4.5-Air-FP8 --tp-size 4 --tool-call-parser glm45 --reasoning-parser glm45, and 2 H100s are enough below the full 128K context - Use the glm45 tool and reasoning parsers for this model, the glm47 parser in Z.ai's current README is for GLM-4.7
- Thinking is on by default, pass
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, which makes the template add /nothink and an empty think block - Declare tools in OpenAI style, and the template renders arguments as arg_key and arg_value pairs that the parser turns back into JSON
- Keep prompts under 128,000 tokens, the tokenizer config's limit, though config.json allows 131,072
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented for the weights
LBS-27B
- Serve with
vllm serve inclusionAI/LBS-27B --tensor-parallel-size 4 --max-model-len 65536, which is what the card's wrapper script runs; keep the context at 32,768 or more for multi-turn images - Build the system prompt with
build_system_promptfrom the LBS branch'szoomin_grounding_protocol.py, send the screenshot afterimage_path: <name>, and don't passtools; the model answers in plain text - Parse
<action>crop_image(image_path=..., x1=..., y1=..., x2=..., y2=...)</action>, cut the crop yourself and return it with its mapping to the original image; allow at most two crops per turn and three per episode - Read the final answer as
[x.xx,y.yy]on a 0 to 1000 scale of the original image, and use your own executor to click - Pass
reasoning_effortasxhigh,mediumorlowonly, since the template raises an error forhigh, and don't count onthinking_budget, which the template ignores - Don't turn on MTP speculative decoding; the MTP weights aren't in the repository though config.json names one MTP layer
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-4.5-Air or LBS-27B?
GLM-4.5-Air scores 59.1 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with GLM-4.5-Air or LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- Carbon-X vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Carbon-X vs LBS-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LBS-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.5-Air vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Hy3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Inkling
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-4.5-Air vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Kimi K3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Kronos
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Inkling-Small vs LBS-27B
- Inkling vs LBS-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3 vs LBS-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs LBS-27B
- Kronos vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- LBS-27B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LBS-27B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LBS-27B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LBS-27B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LBS-27B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LBS-27B vs occamy-1.0
- LBS-27B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LBS-27B vs Recursive Flint
- LBS-27B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LBS-27B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LBS-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LBS-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LBS-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LBS-27B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-4-5-air-vs-lbs-27b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-4-5-air.json·/api/v1/tools/lbs-27b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-4-5-air lbs-27b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-4-5-air", "b": "lbs-27b"}at/mcp, no key