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

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-0.8B's 46.7 (D), and leads in every scored category. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 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 80
  • Risk, 60 against 55
  • Agent interface, 65 against 60
  • Documentation and upkeep, 68 against 37

Watch for

Not a general assistant or a tool caller

Qwen3.5-0.8B D

Best for Builders who want a near-free local helper or fine-tuning base for narrow tasks on a phone-class device, laptop or CPU

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

Watch for

No quantised build from Alibaba and no inference provider found

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.

Documentation and upkeep Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +31

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.

Qwen3.5-0.8B 37

The card covers six of the seven items, missing only a cut-off (17), because it states the intended uses and warns about thinking loops. Training data is a general description without a cut-off (5). The files last changed on 2 March 2026, 248 days before this check, within a year (5). No Qwen member has answered any of the 15 discussions that aren't pull requests (0). Qwen3-0.6B stays in its own repository without a dated note (5), and a template fix and the missing generation_config.json wait unanswered (5). 17+5+5+0+5+5 = 37.

Reach Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +5

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.

Qwen3.5-0.8B 80

Memory earns the full 30, since LM Studio's Q4_K_M build with its projector is 0.73 GB (0.88 GB with the fifth added) and Ollama's Q8_0 build was 1.0 GB, both far within 16 GB. Alibaba publishes no quantised 0.8B, so builds scores 0. Runtimes reach the 25 cap on llama.cpp, Ollama (through its pinned llama.cpp), vLLM, SGLang, LM Studio and Transformers. Apache 2.0 with nothing added gives terms 15 and the ungated repository download 10. Hosted too scores 0, as the Hub maps no inference provider to this size. 30+25+0+15+10+0 = 80.

Risk Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +5

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.

Qwen3.5-0.8B 55

Safetensors only with no remote code gives file safety its 25, and files in the Qwen organisation the publisher's GitHub links to, each with a hash on the Hub, give provenance 15. The Apache 2.0 licence carries none of the deductions, so licence risk keeps 15. Safety evaluation, agent guidance and a security programme score 0, since the card has no safety results or agent cautions and no reporting route was found. The Qwen3.5 blog and Alibaba's security response centre couldn't be read, so those are scored as absent and left open. 25+15+0+0+15+0 = 55.

Agent interface Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +5

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B 65

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository. Tool-calling format 10, the card doesn't mention tools. Trained tool calling 10, the template can render tool calls, but the card presents the model as a memory writer that returns memories as text or JSON and says nothing of calling tools. Structured output 5, the card's quickstart asks for a JSON object with a memories list in the system prompt and shows nothing else, no response_format and no schema, so JSON output is shown by example without a documented way to constrain it. Reasoning control 10, the card passes reasoning_effort as no_think per request through chat_template_kwargs, and the template takes high, low or no_think. Context 10, 262,144 tokens native (max_position_embeddings in config.json). 20 + 10 + 10 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 65.

Qwen3.5-0.8B 60

The template ships in the repository (20) and the model was trained for tool use with several calls per turn in the template (20). Tool-calling format gets 10, because the card names the qwen3_coder parser but leaves the format to the template. Reasoning control scores 0, since the card shows how to turn thinking on but not where the reasoning comes back. 262,144 tokens is native (10). Structured output scores 0, as nothing documents JSON output for the model. 20+10+20+0+0+10 = 60.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runHy-Memory-30B-A3BQwen3.5-0.8BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258580Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +5
Risk20%206055Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +5
Agent interface10%106560Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +5
Documentation and upkeep10%106837Hy-Memory-30B-A3B +31
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100D 46.7/100

Facts side by side

FactHy-Memory-30B-A3BQwen3.5-0.8B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorTencent (Hy team)Alibaba (Qwen team)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-162026-03-02
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone2.8/5 (4)

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.

Qwen3.5-0.8B

A tiny vision-language model for prototypes, fine-tuning and narrow local steps such as routing, tagging or reading an image. It runs in about 1 GB at 4 or 8 bits in six runtimes under plain Apache 2.0. Keep thinking off, since the card warns it loops. The card has no safety results, and Qwen has answered none of its discussions.

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

Qwen3.5-0.8B

  1. Smallest start is ollama run qwen3.5:0.8b, or qwen3.5:0.8b-q8_0 at 1.0 GB
  2. Full precision vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3.5-0.8B --port 8000 --max-model-len 262144 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder
  3. Thinking is off by default; if you turn it on with "chat_template_kwargs": {"enable_thinking": true}, stream and cut off runaway output, since the card warns of thinking loops, and add --reasoning-parser qwen3 in vLLM or SGLang to split the reasoning out
  4. There's no generation_config.json, so pass the card's sampling yourself, for example temperature=1.0, top_p=1.0, top_k=20, presence_penalty=2.0 for text without thinking
  5. Use it for narrow steps or as a fine-tuning base, not as the main agent, as the card itself suggests
  6. Validate any JSON it returns, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Hy-Memory-30B-A3B or Qwen3.5-0.8B?

Hy-Memory-30B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-0.8B's 46.7 (D), and leads in every scored category.

Other comparisons with Hy-Memory-30B-A3B or Qwen3.5-0.8B

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.