Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Hy3 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
Hy3 scores 62.6 (B) on agent readiness against Nanbeige4.2-3B's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Nanbeige4.2-3B leads on reach, agent interface and documentation and upkeep. 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
Hy3 B
Best for Teams with an 8-GPU server who want an agent-tuned MoE model under plain Apache 2.0
Ahead on
- Risk, 60 against 55
Watch for
597.6 GB in BF16, 299.9 GB in FP8 and 168.5 GB at the smallest 4-bit build
Best for Local agents that need tool calling and a long context on a laptop or a small GPU
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 70
- Agent interface, 85 against 75
- Documentation and upkeep, 72 against 56
Watch for
Its own architecture: Transformers loads it only with the repository's code
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 Nanbeige4.2-3B +16
Hy3 56
The model card earns 11, covering intended use, architecture, parameters and context but not limitations, languages or a knowledge cut-off. Training data earns 5 for a general statement with no cut-off. The last change earns 10, a config.json edit on 20 July and AngelSlim uploads on 21 July, within 180 days on 2 November 2026; the line drops to 5 after 17 January 2027 unless the files change. Responsiveness earns 10, with Tencent replies on 7 of 19 discussions and none since 22 July. Version policy earns the full 10, since the preview stays in its own repository and the card dates it and says what changed. File health earns 10, with files that agree and no broken-file report waiting.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 72
Model card 17, Intended use, limitations, the architecture, the parameters (3B outside the embeddings), the context and the languages (in the metadata) are on the card. Training data 5, A general description of how the fine-tuning and reinforcement learning data was built and filtered, with no sources, sizes or cut-off. Last change 15, the last commit, on 11 September 2026, updated modeling_nanbeige.py, 60 days before this check and within 90. Responsiveness 20, Of the 34 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (21 July to 10 September 2026), 20 have a reply from a Nanbeige member, which is most. Version policy 5, Nanbeige's earlier models (Nanbeige4-3B, 4.1-3B) stay in their own repositories, as the Base, FP8, 8-bit and DSpark builds of this one do. File health 10, Config, tokenizer config, template and card agree on the architecture and the 262,144 tokens. 17 + 5 + 15 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 72.
Reach Nanbeige4.2-3B +15
Hy3 70
Memory earns 5, because the smallest build of 4-bit precision or better is AngelSlim's GPTQ-Int4 of 168.5 GB, about 202 GB with the fifth added, which is within 256 GB but beyond any single workstation. The 1-bit IQ1_M GGUF fits our reference machine but sits below the 4-bit line. Runtimes earn 20, for model code in released Transformers, vLLM, SGLang and llama.cpp; Ollama and LM Studio have no entry for it. Builds earn the full 15, with Tencent's FP8 repository and AngelSlim's GPTQ and GGUF builds. Terms earn 15 for plain Apache 2.0. Download earns 10, with no gate and no account. Hosted earns 5, since Featherless AI and DeepInfra serve it live through Hugging Face.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 85
Memory 30, the smallest build from Nanbeige is the FP8 repository (the 8-bit GPTQ one is the same size), 5.19 GB, and 5.19 GB × 1.2 = 6.2 GB, within 16 GB. bartowski's GGUF isn't read for this line. Runtimes 15, Released SGLang 0.5.23 has the model (srt/models/nanbeige.py) with its parsers, llama.cpp b12242 has the nanbeige architecture, and vLLM 0.33.0 names NanbeigeForCausalLM in its registry, served through its Transformers backend. Builds 15, Quantised builds from Nanbeige at two precisions, FP8 and 8-bit GPTQ, each in its own repository. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata, an OSI licence, with no use policy or other terms on the card. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its FP8 and 8-bit repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face maps no inference provider to it, and no Nanbeige or BOSS Zhipin API for it was found. 30 + 15 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 85.
Agent interface Nanbeige4.2-3B +10
Hy3 75
The chat template earns 20, a chat_template.jinja in the repository. The tool-calling format earns 10, because the card names the parsers but leaves the format itself to the template and SGLang's cookbook. Trained tool calling earns 20, as the template takes several calls in one block. Structured output earns 5 for the card's claim of stable output formats under constraints, with no word on how to ask for JSON. Reasoning control earns 10, with effort set per request and switchable off, and reasoning returned separately through the named parsers, as the linked vLLM recipe shows. Context earns 10 for 262,144 tokens native.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 85
Chat template 20, A Jinja chat template in tokenizer_config.json (7,961 characters), with enable_thinking, preserve_thinking, tools and tool_call_format switches. Tool-calling format 25, the card says passing tools switches on the tool template and recommends tool_call_format xml, with json for compatibility, and its SGLang and vLLM commands name the nanbeige tool-call parser, which released SGLang 0.5.23 has. Trained tool calling 20, the card describes fine-tuning on tool-use environments and agent scaffolds and reinforcement learning on agent tasks, and the template tells the model it may call one or more functions and renders every call in a turn. Structured output 0, Neither the card nor the files mention JSON or JSON Schema output, beyond json as a tool-call format. Reasoning control 10, the card documents enable_thinking, on by default and False per request, and preserve_thinking for earlier turns, and names the nanbeige reasoning parser, which returns the reasoning apart from the answer. Context 10, 262,144 tokens, which the card says the model supports and config.json gives as max_position_embeddings. 20 + 25 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 85.
Risk Hy3 +5
Hy3 60
File safety earns the full 25, safetensors only with no pickle files, and the documented route runs vLLM or SGLang from their own code with a Jinja template, so nothing from the repository runs at load or prompt time. Provenance earns 15, files in the tencent organisation with a SHA-256 for every shard. Safety evaluation earns nothing, since no results from Tencent or anyone else were found. Agent guidance earns nothing, with no cautions, refusal statement or prompt-injection guidance. Licence risk keeps all 15 under plain Apache 2.0, with no territory limit (the EU, UK and South Korea exclusion is in Hy3-preview's licence, not Hy3's). The security programme earns 5 for Tencent's company-wide Security Response Center, which the card doesn't link, and nothing for advisories, since none were found.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 55
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, the files sit in the Nanbeige organisation (Nanbeige LLM Lab), which the lab's arXiv report for this model links, so the publisher's own account, although the Hub hasn't verified it (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 5, General cautions: the limitations section says outputs may be inaccurate, biased or harmful. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, no threshold and no clause letting the licensor change or revoke it. Security programme 5, BOSS Zhipin runs a security response centre for reporting flaws in its products, as read for the Nanbeige4.3-33B listing (5), though nothing links it to the model. 15 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 15 + 5 = 55.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Hy3 | Nanbeige4.2-3B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 70 | 85 | Nanbeige4.2-3B +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 60 | 55 | Hy3 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 85 | Nanbeige4.2-3B +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 56 | 72 | Nanbeige4.2-3B +16 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 62.6/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Hy3 | Nanbeige4.2-3B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Tencent (Hy team) | Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 (Hub metadata only; the repository has no LICENSE file) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-09-11 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
Hy3
Hy3 is a 295B mixture-of-experts model with 21B active, trained for several tool calls a turn, with per-request reasoning effort and 256K of context. It needs an 8-GPU server for FP8 or about 200 GB for a 4-bit build. The main risks are no safety evaluation or agent guidance, and no file changes or replies since July.
Nanbeige4.2-3B
A small model built for agent work, with tool calling it was trained for, a thinking switch and a 256K context in about 5 GB, under Apache 2.0, from a lab that answers most questions. Its architecture is its own, so check your runtime: SGLang and llama.cpp have it, Transformers needs the repository's code, and Nanbeige ships no GGUF.
Before you call either
Hy3
- Start it with vLLM on 8 GPUs, vllm serve tencent/Hy3-FP8 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --tool-call-parser hy_v3 --reasoning-parser hy_v3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --served-model-name hy3
- In SGLang use --tool-call-parser hunyuan --reasoning-parser hunyuan, as the card shows
- Pass reasoning_effort (no_think, low or high) in chat_template_kwargs; the default is no_think, and any other value raises a template error
- With the vLLM reasoning parser the chain of thought comes back in message.reasoning and the answer in message.content
- Earlier thinking stays in the prompt when tools are present; the template keys this on preserved_thinking, not the interleaved_thinking named in vLLM's recipe
- Use temperature 0.9 and top_p 1.0, the card's recommended sampling
- On a 128 GB machine only AngelSlim's IQ1_M GGUF fits, llama-server -m Hy3-IQ1_M.gguf -ctk q8_0 -ctv q8_0 -fa on -c 65536, with llama.cpp b11768 or later; at 89.4 GB × 1.2 it sits right at the 107.4 GB ceiling, so shorten the context if it fails to load, and expect a 1-bit build to fall short of Tencent's numbers
- Without the hardware, call it through Featherless AI or DeepInfra via Hugging Face's inference providers
Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Serve it with SGLang 0.5.23 or later and pass
--tool-call-parser nanbeige --reasoning-parser nanbeige - Pass
toolsin the request. The card recommendstool_call_format="xml" - Set
preserve_thinkingtrue for multi-turn tool use and coding, false for plain chat - Use temperature 1.0 for agent and tool work and 0.6 for reasoning and chat, per the card
- For llama.cpp use b12242 or later. The GGUF files on the Hub are bartowski's, not Nanbeige's
- If you load it with Transformers, read modeling_nanbeige.py first: trust_remote_code runs it
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Hy3 or Nanbeige4.2-3B?
Hy3 scores 62.6 (B) on agent readiness against Nanbeige4.2-3B's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Nanbeige4.2-3B leads on reach, agent interface and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with Hy3 or Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Hy3
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Arete-27B vs Hy3
- Arete-27B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Hy3
- BigBang-v1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Carbon-X vs Hy3
- Carbon-X vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Cola2 vs Hy3
- Cola2 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Hy3
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Hy3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Hy3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Devstral Small 2 vs Hy3
- Devstral Small 2 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Hy3
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Hy3
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Hy3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Hy3
- GLM-5.3 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-20b vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Hy3
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Hy3
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Hy3
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Hy3
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Hy3 vs Inkling
- Hy3 vs Inkling-Small
- Hy3 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Hy3 vs Kimi K3
- Hy3 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Hy3 vs Kolibri-1
- Hy3 vs Kronos
- Hy3 vs Laguna M.1
- Hy3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Hy3 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy3 vs LongCat-2.5
- Hy3 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Hy3 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Hy3 vs Mistral Large 4
- Hy3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Hy3 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Hy3 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Hy3 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Hy3 vs North Mini Code 1.0
- Hy3 vs occamy-1.0
- Hy3 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Hy3 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Hy3 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Hy3 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Hy3 vs Recursive Flint
- Hy3 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Hy3 vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- Hy3 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Hy3 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Hy3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Hy3 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Hy3 vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- Hy3 vs ZAYA1-8B
- Inkling-Small vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Inkling vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kimi K3 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kronos vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LBS-27B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Mistral Large 4 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs North Mini Code 1.0
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs ZAYA1-8B
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/hy3-vs-nanbeige-4-2-3b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/hy3.json·/api/v1/tools/nanbeige-4-2-3b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare hy3 nanbeige-4-2-3b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "hy3", "b": "nanbeige-4-2-3b"}at/mcp, no key