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

Inkling vs Laguna XS 2.1

Inkling scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna XS 2.1's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Laguna XS 2.1 leads on reach. 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

Inkling B

Best for Agents calling a hosted open multimodal model with audio input, or teams with a multi-GPU datacentre node who want to run it themselves.

Ahead on

  • Risk, 70 against 55
  • Documentation and upkeep, 82 against 46

Watch for

The smallest build Thinking Machines publishes needs about 710 GB, beyond any single workstation

Laguna XS 2.1 C

Best for Agents that want a fast local coding model on a 32 GB GPU or Mac, with tool calling and a permissive licence.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 85 against 50

Watch for

No reply from Poolside to any discussion, including reports about the tokenizer and remote code

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runInklingLaguna XS 2.1Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%255085Laguna XS 2.1 +35
Risk20%207055Inkling +15
Agent interface10%108585even
Documentation and upkeep10%108246Inkling +36
Negative events≤1500
TotalB 64.2/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactInklingLaguna XS 2.1
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorThinking Machines LabPoolside
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0OpenMDW-1.1
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-232026-08-19
Terms last updatedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno 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 reviews3/5 (4)2.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Inkling

Thinking Machines' large multimodal generalist, stronger than Inkling-Small on factual recall by its own numbers. It needs about 710 GB of datacentre GPU memory even in NVFP4, so most agents will use a host such as Together AI or Tinker. The main risks are a use policy that binds on download and can change, and no outside safety results.

Laguna XS 2.1

A small coding and agent cousin with 3B active parameters, so it's quick on modest hardware. Poolside's 4-bit GGUF, also Ollama's default, needs about 24 GB, and every major runtime runs it. The main risks are that nobody at Poolside answers its discussions, there are no safety results, and the SGLang route runs repository code.

Before you call either

Inkling

  1. Unless you have a multi-GPU Blackwell or H200 node, call it through Together AI, Fireworks, DeepInfra or Tinker rather than starting it
  2. On 8 B200 GPUs, SGLang's recipe is sglang serve --trust-remote-code --model-path thinkingmachines/Inkling-NVFP4 --tp 8 --quantization modelopt_fp4 --enable-multimodal --reasoning-parser inkling --tool-call-parser inkling
  3. Use the inkling tool parser, not Hermes, and the inkling reasoning parser
  4. Pass reasoning_effort as none, minimal, low, medium, high (the default) or max, or a number from 0 to 0.99. The repository's template has no xhigh preset and raises an error for it, though Thinking Machines' docs list xhigh
  5. Tool call arguments must reach the template as an object, not a JSON string, or it raises an error
  6. Audio should be 16 kHz WAV, ideally under 20 minutes, and images 40 to 4096 px a side, per the card
  7. Read the Model Acceptable Use Policy before deploying, it binds on download and bars some uses that are legal

Laguna XS 2.1

  1. Quickest start is ollama run laguna-xs-2.1, 20 GB of files, the same Q4_K_M as Poolside's GGUF
  2. On our reference machine use llama-server -hf poolside/Laguna-XS-2.1-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja -c 131072, from a llama.cpp release with the laguna architecture (b11772 has it), or BF16 with vLLM (66.9 GB)
  3. With vLLM use --tool-call-parser poolside_v1 --reasoning-parser poolside_v1 --enable-auto-tool-choice, on a build with vllm-project/vllm#47311, or --tool-call-parser glm47 on older builds
  4. Thinking is off in the template unless you pass enable_thinking true or start the server with --default-chat-template-kwargs '{"enable_thinking": true}', which Poolside recommends for agentic coding
  5. Pass earlier reasoning back as reasoning_content in the history, since the card says reasoning may stop in later steps if it's dropped
  6. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0 and top_k 20
  7. The card warns that Ollama on Apple Silicon may return empty output until llama.cpp#25389 ships
  8. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Inkling or Laguna XS 2.1?

Inkling scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna XS 2.1's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Laguna XS 2.1 leads on reach.

Other comparisons with Inkling or Laguna XS 2.1

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.