Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
GLM-4.7-Flash scores 63 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna S 2.1's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Laguna S 2.1 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 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents and developers who want a small, permissively licensed tool-calling model on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac, in almost any runtime
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 75
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.8 against 2.3 out of 5
Watch for
No change to the files since 29 January 2026 and no zai-org reply on discussions since 31 January
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.
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 41 against 28
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 | GLM-4.7-Flash | Laguna S 2.1 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 80 | 75 | GLM-4.7-Flash +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 55 | even |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 85 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 28 | 41 | Laguna S 2.1 +13 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 63/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-4.7-Flash | Laguna S 2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | Poolside |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | OpenMDW-1.1 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-01-29 | 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 | 2.8/5 (4) | 2.3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
GLM-4.7-Flash
A small MIT-licensed mixture-of-experts model with about 3B active parameters, for local agent and coding work with several tool calls per turn and optional thinking. It runs in Ollama at about 23 GB and in nearly every common runtime. The main risk is neglect, with no changes or replies since early February and no 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
GLM-4.7-Flash
- On our reference machine start it with
vllm serve zai-org/GLM-4.7-Flash --max-model-len 65536 --tool-call-parser glm47 --reasoning-parser glm45 --enable-auto-tool-choice --served-model-name glm-4.7-flash - Or run
ollama run glm-4.7-flashfor the 19 GB q4_K_M build - Without the glm47 and glm45 parsers, tool calls and reasoning come back as plain text
- Use a released vLLM (0.32.0 or later) or SGLang (0.5.22 or later); the card's nightly and pull-request builds date from January 2026
- Pass
chat_template_kwargs: {"enable_thinking": false}for short tasks, since thinking is on by default - Set
clear_thinking: falseto keep earlier reasoning in multi-turn agent work, as Z.ai does for τ²-Bench and Terminal Bench - Set the context length yourself, since config.json allows 202,752 tokens and tokenizer_config.json says 128,000
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, GLM-4.7-Flash or Laguna S 2.1?
GLM-4.7-Flash scores 63 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna S 2.1's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Laguna S 2.1 leads on documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with GLM-4.7-Flash or Laguna S 2.1
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna S 2.1
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Laguna S 2.1
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Inkling
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kimi K3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- 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/glm-4-7-flash-vs-laguna-s-2-1.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-4-7-flash.json·/api/v1/tools/laguna-s-2-1.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-4-7-flash laguna-s-2-1(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-4-7-flash", "b": "laguna-s-2-1"}at/mcp, no key