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

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Kimi K3.1 Pro

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B C

Best for Agents with an external memory framework that want a local model for the write path on a 24 GB card

Ahead on

  • Reach, 85 against 40
  • Risk, 60 against 50
  • Documentation and upkeep, 68 against 51

Watch for

Not a general assistant or a tool caller

Kimi K3.1 Pro D

Best for Operators with a multi-accelerator node who want Moonshot's newest open-weight model for coding and long agent sessions, and everyone else through an API

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

1,561 GB of files, so it needs a node of eight large accelerators at least

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Reach Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +45

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 85

Memory 25, Tencent's own Q4_K_M GGUF is 18.24 GB, and 18.24 GB × 1.2 = 21.9 GB, which fits 24 GB but not 16 GB. Its Q3_K_M file and the two files with experts at 1 or 2 bits are below 4-bit precision and don't count. Runtimes 20, hy_v3 model code in released vLLM (HYV3ForCausalLM in the v0.33.0 registry), SGLang v0.5.23 (hunyuan_v3.py), Transformers v5.22.2 and llama.cpp b12242, 5 each. Builds 15, Tencent publishes an FP8 repository and a GGUF repository with Q4_K_M, Q6_K and Q8_0 files in its own organisation, so quantised builds at two precisions or more. Terms 15, Apache 2.0, with only a preamble naming Tencent as copyright holder above the licence text. Download 10, gated is false for the main, FP8 and GGUF repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account or terms to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face lists no inference provider for the model (an empty provider mapping on 10 November 2026), and the card names no API. 25 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 85.

Kimi K3.1 Pro 40

Memory 0, the only build is Moonshot's 1,561 GB MXFP4 release, far above 256 GB. Runtimes 5, llama.cpp b12242 alone has the model code in a release, since vLLM's recipe needs 0.34.0 and SGLang's cookbook a branch. Builds 10, one precision. Terms 10, free commercial use below a model-as-a-service revenue threshold. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 5, Moonshot's API and Together serve it. 0 + 5 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 40.

Documentation and upkeep Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +17

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 68

Model card 8, Intended use (the write path of Mem0, MemOS and Hy-Memory), parameters (30B, about 3B active) and languages (English and Chinese, in the metadata) are there. Training data 5, A general description of the two training stages inside the harnesses, with no datasets, sizes or cut-off. Last change 20, the last commit, on 16 October 2026, added the licence and the card, 25 days before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 4 discussions that aren't pull requests (16 to 30 October 2026), 3 have a reply from a tencent organisation member. Version policy 5, A first release, with nothing replaced. File health 10, Config, tokenizer and template agree on the architecture, the context and the thinking levels. 8 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 68.

Kimi K3.1 Pro 51

Model card 11, no limitations, languages or cut-off. Training data 5, one general sentence. Last change 20, a commit on 5 November 2026. Responsiveness 0, none of the 8 newest discussions has a reply from Moonshot. Version policy 5, Kimi K3 keeps its repository and no dated note was found. File health 10, the files agree. 11 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 51.

Risk Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 60

File safety 25, 51 safetensors shards and no pickle or Python files. Provenance 15, files in the tencent organisation that the card's own resource list links to (10), with a SHA-256 listed for all 53 large files (5). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, no prompt-injection guidance, instruction hierarchy, account of trained refusals or general cautions on the card. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 with no use policy, no field-of-use limit, no threshold and no clause letting Tencent change the terms. Security programme 5, Tencent's Security Response Center takes vulnerability reports company-wide with published reward rules, as the Hy3 listing records (5). 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 5 = 60.

Kimi K3.1 Pro 50

File safety 15, safetensors only, less 10 for remote code and prompts built by the repository's script. Provenance 15, Moonshot's own organisation with a hash on every file. Safety evaluation 10, Moonshot's own cyber benchmark results and nobody else's yet. Agent guidance 0, none on the card. Licence risk 10, the revenue threshold. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 50.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runHy-Memory-30B-A3BKimi K3.1 ProEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258540Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +45
Risk20%206050Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +10
Agent interface10%106565even
Documentation and upkeep10%106851Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +17
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100D 48.6/100

Facts side by side

FactHy-Memory-30B-A3BKimi K3.1 Pro
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorTencent (Hy team)Moonshot AI
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Kimi K3.1 Pro License (modified MIT)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-162026-11-05
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked

Verdicts

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B

A specialist that writes an agent's long-term memory, built to slot into Mem0, MemOS or Tencent's own framework in place of a general model. It fits a 24 GB card from Tencent's own GGUF, under plain Apache 2.0, and Tencent answers on the repository. Its results are Tencent's own and nobody has rerun them.

Kimi K3.1 Pro

Moonshot's newest flagship, eight days old when read, for operators with a rack. Only llama.cpp has its model code in a release, with vLLM and SGLang support still on a release candidate and a branch. The licence is permissive below a revenue threshold, and Moonshot hasn't answered a discussion on the repository yet.

Before you call either

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B

  1. Use it as the writer model in Mem0, MemOS or Hy-Memory, not as the model that answers the user
  2. Start it with llama-server -hf tencent/Hy-Memory-30B-A3B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, or with vLLM under the served name hy-memory as the card does
  3. Pass reasoning_effort as no_think in chat_template_kwargs and temperature 0, as the card's example does
  4. Ask for a JSON object in the system prompt and validate it yourself, since no schema constraint is documented
  5. Treat what it stores as unverified. It keeps what a conversation says, true or not

Kimi K3.1 Pro

  1. Use Moonshot's API or Together unless you have a node of eight B300-class accelerators
  2. With vLLM use 0.34.0 or later and the recipe's flags, --tool-call-parser kimi_k3 --reasoning-parser kimi_k3
  3. Pass the whole assistant message back in later turns, reasoning_content and tool_calls included, as the card requires
  4. Set reasoning_effort to low, high or max per request. Max is the default and thinking can't be turned off
  5. Kimi K3's model code doesn't load it, because the attention layers changed
  6. Validate JSON output yourself, since the card doesn't document structured output for the weights

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Hy-Memory-30B-A3B or Kimi K3.1 Pro?

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Kimi K3.1 Pro's 48.6 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories.

Other comparisons with Hy-Memory-30B-A3B or Kimi K3.1 Pro

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.