Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Kolibri-1 vs occamy-1.0
Kolibri-1 and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 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
Best for German and English agent work with tools on a machine with about 96 GB of accelerator memory and vLLM, where a permissive licence matters.
Ahead on
- Risk, 65 against 55
- Agent interface, 90 against 70
Watch for
The smallest publisher build is FP8 at 78.8 GB, so it needs about 95 GB and won't fit a 64 GB machine
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 60
Watch for
No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Kolibri-1 | occamy-1.0 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 85 | occamy-1.0 +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 65 | 55 | Kolibri-1 +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 70 | Kolibri-1 +20 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 70 | 74 | occamy-1.0 +4 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Kolibri-1 | occamy-1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Aleph Alpha | 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 | 2026-10-19 | 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 | 3.3/5 (4) | 3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Kolibri-1
Kolibri-1 is a German and English reasoning model with a documented tool-call format, switchable thinking and a 262,144-token context, under Apache 2.0. Aleph Alpha's FP8 build needs about 95 GB and runs on vLLM through its plugin, Transformers 5.20 or recent llama.cpp. The main risk is no published safety results or security contact, and few repository answers.
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
Kolibri-1
- Start it with pip install 'aleph-alpha-inference>=1' then vllm serve Aleph-Alpha/Kolibri-1 --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --reasoning-parser kolibri1 --tool-call-parser kolibri1 --enable-auto-tool-choice
- Without the kolibri1 tool-call parser and enable-auto-tool-choice, tool calls come back as text in tool_call tags
- The plugin supports one vLLM minor version, 0.29, so don't upgrade vLLM while it's installed
- Thinking is on by default at high effort. Pass reasoning_effort none or enable_thinking false in chat_template_kwargs for short tasks
- Recommended sampling is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.97 and top_k 128
- Past 262,144 tokens, add --max-model-len 1048576 and the max_position_embeddings override in --hf-overrides, though Aleph Alpha recommends staying at or below 262,144
- With Transformers 5.20 or later, tokenizer.parse_response returns the answer in content and the reasoning in thinking
- On the reference machine the FP8 build fits by size, but no document confirms vLLM runs FP8 on gfx1151, and Aleph Alpha ships no GGUF for llama.cpp
- Validate tool results in your own code, as the card asks
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, Kolibri-1 or occamy-1.0?
Kolibri-1 and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 leads on reach.
Other comparisons with Kolibri-1 or occamy-1.0
- Agents-A1-4B vs Kolibri-1
- Agents-A1-4B vs occamy-1.0
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kolibri-1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kolibri-1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs occamy-1.0
- BigBang-v1 vs Kolibri-1
- BigBang-v1 vs occamy-1.0
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Kolibri-1
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs occamy-1.0
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Kolibri-1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs occamy-1.0
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Kolibri-1
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-4.5-Air vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3 vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-5.3 vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kolibri-1
- gpt-oss-120b vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-20b vs Kolibri-1
- gpt-oss-20b vs occamy-1.0
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Kolibri-1
- Granite 4.2 3B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy3 vs Kolibri-1
- Hy3 vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling-Small vs Kolibri-1
- Inkling-Small vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling vs Kolibri-1
- Inkling vs occamy-1.0
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Kolibri-1
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs occamy-1.0
- Kimi K3 vs Kolibri-1
- Kimi K3 vs occamy-1.0
- Kolibri-1 vs Laguna M.1
- Kolibri-1 vs Laguna S 2.1
- Kolibri-1 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kolibri-1 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Kolibri-1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Kolibri-1 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Kolibri-1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Kolibri-1 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Kolibri-1 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Kolibri-1 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Kolibri-1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Kolibri-1 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Kolibri-1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Kolibri-1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- 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/kolibri-1-vs-occamy-1-0.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/kolibri-1.json·/api/v1/tools/occamy-1-0.json - From a terminal
anchor compare kolibri-1 occamy-1-0(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "kolibri-1", "b": "occamy-1-0"}at/mcp, no key