Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Hy3 vs occamy-1.0
Hy3 scores 62.6 (B) on agent readiness against occamy-1.0's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. occamy-1.0 leads on reach 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 2870 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
- Agent interface, 75 against 70
Watch for
597.6 GB in BF16, 299.9 GB in FP8 and 168.5 GB at the smallest 4-bit build
Best for Agents that want an Apache 2.0 mixture-of-experts model tuned for long tool-using tasks on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac.
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 56
Watch for
No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Hy3 | occamy-1.0 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 70 | 85 | occamy-1.0 +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 60 | 55 | Hy3 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 70 | Hy3 +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 56 | 74 | occamy-1.0 +18 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 62.6/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Hy3 | occamy-1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Tencent (Hy team) | Accio (Accio-Lab) |
| 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 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-10-02 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 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) | 3/5 (4) |
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.
occamy-1.0
A Qwen3.6-35B-A3B fine-tuned for long agent work with tools, files and code, under plain Apache 2.0, and Accio's 4-bit builds run in about 23 GB. The main gaps are no safety results, agent guidance or security contact, and every benchmark figure is Accio's own.
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
occamy-1.0
- Serve with
--reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coderon vLLM 0.19.0 or SGLang 0.5.10 and later - BF16 is 70.2 GB, so on a 128 GB machine run it without the card's 8-way tensor parallelism
- Keep the whole assistant message, reasoning and tool calls included, in later turns, as the card says
- Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 and presence_penalty 1.5
- With the GGUFs, NFC-normalise input text and read TOKENIZER.md, since the files store qwen2 pre-tokenizer metadata
- The base's MTP layer isn't in this checkpoint, Accio-Lab/occamy-1.0-MTP is an experimental separate head
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Hy3 or occamy-1.0?
Hy3 scores 62.6 (B) on agent readiness against occamy-1.0's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. occamy-1.0 leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with Hy3 or occamy-1.0
- Agents-A1-4B vs Hy3
- Agents-A1-4B vs occamy-1.0
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs occamy-1.0
- BigBang-v1 vs Hy3
- BigBang-v1 vs occamy-1.0
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Hy3
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs occamy-1.0
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Hy3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Hy3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs occamy-1.0
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Hy3
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Hy3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Hy3
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3 vs Hy3
- GLM-5.3 vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-120b vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-20b vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-20b vs occamy-1.0
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Hy3
- Granite 4.2 3B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy3 vs Inkling
- Hy3 vs Inkling-Small
- Hy3 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Hy3 vs Kimi K3
- Hy3 vs Kolibri-1
- Hy3 vs Laguna M.1
- Hy3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Hy3 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Hy3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy3 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Hy3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- 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 Olmo 3 7B Think
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- 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 SmolLM3-3B
- Hy3 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Hy3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling-Small vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling vs occamy-1.0
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs occamy-1.0
- Kimi K3 vs occamy-1.0
- Kolibri-1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna M.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna S 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs occamy-1.0
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM5-2B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs occamy-1.0
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs occamy-1.0
- occamy-1.0 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- occamy-1.0 vs SmolLM3-3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/hy3-vs-occamy-1-0.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/hy3.json·/api/v1/tools/occamy-1-0.json - From a terminal
anchor compare hy3 occamy-1-0(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "hy3", "b": "occamy-1-0"}at/mcp, no key