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

Granite 4.2 3B vs Ling-3.0-tiny

Granite 4.2 3B scores 59.8 (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

Granite 4.2 3B C

Best for Agents on small hardware that want a permissive reasoning model for tool calls and coding, with thinking they can switch off

Ahead on

  • Reach, 95 against 90
  • Risk, 55 against 50
  • Agent interface, 85 against 60
  • Documentation and upkeep, 92 against 56

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.8 against 2.8 out of 5

Watch for

No safety results published for 4.2, and only general safety cautions

Ling-3.0-tiny C

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 21

Watch for

No hosted provider today, and Ollama support is only an unmerged pull request

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runGranite 4.2 3BLing-3.0-tinyEdge
Capability35%352131Ling-3.0-tiny +10
Reach25%259590Granite 4.2 3B +5
Risk20%205550Granite 4.2 3B +5
Agent interface10%108560Granite 4.2 3B +25
Documentation and upkeep10%109256Granite 4.2 3B +36
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 59.8/100C 55/100

Facts side by side

FactGranite 4.2 3BLing-3.0-tiny
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorIBMinclusionAI (Ant Group)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0MIT
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-202026-08-31
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno 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 reviews3.8/5 (4)2.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Granite 4.2 3B

A small reasoning cousin for tool calls, coding and multilingual chat that runs almost anywhere, from a 2.2 GB Ollama build to vLLM and SGLang, under plain Apache 2.0 with signed files and a dataset disclosure. Thinking turns off or shortens per request. It has no published safety results and no documented JSON mode.

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

Granite 4.2 3B

  1. Start it with ollama run granite4.2:3b; set options.num_ctx in the request, since Ollama's default context is short and the model takes up to 131,072
  2. With vLLM 0.32.0 or later, serve ibm-granite/granite-4.2-3b with --reasoning-parser granite_thinking_parser --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --enable-auto-tool-choice; that release has the parser built in, so the card's --reasoning-parser-plugin ./granite_thinking_parser.py isn't needed
  3. With SGLang 0.5.18 or later, --reasoning-parser auto --tool-call-parser auto resolve to IBM's recommended parsers, and the reasoning comes back in reasoning_content
  4. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 for every mode, as IBM requires
  5. Pass enable_thinking false for direct answers or low_effort true for short reasoning, through chat_template_kwargs on an OpenAI-compatible server
  6. Earlier turns' thinking is stripped by default (truncate_history_thinking), so pass it false to keep reasoning in multi-turn history
  7. For JSON, use the runtime's guided decoding, since IBM documents no JSON mode for 4.2
  8. Verify the files with python -m model_signing verify sigstore and IBM's identity, per IBM's signature guide

Ling-3.0-tiny

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. With SGLang 0.5.22, its cookbook uses --reasoning-parser deepseek-r1 --tool-call-parser glm45 for this model, and drop the card's NEXTN flags since tiny has no MTP layer
  4. Thinking is on by default, pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks
  5. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 20
  6. The template keeps earlier reasoning in the prompt, which grows long agent sessions
  7. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
  8. 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, Granite 4.2 3B or Ling-3.0-tiny?

Granite 4.2 3B scores 59.8 (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 Granite 4.2 3B or Ling-3.0-tiny

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.