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

Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniMax-M2.7

Laguna S 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M2.7's 56.1 (C), 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 2870 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Laguna S 2.1 C

Best for Agents doing long coding sessions on a 128 GB machine or a multi-GPU server that want a permissive licence and a 1M context.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 75 against 60
  • Risk, 55 against 30
  • Agent interface, 85 against 75
  • Documentation and upkeep, 41 against 27

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.3 against 1.8 out of 5

Watch for

No reply from Poolside to any of 34 discussions, many of them reports about thinking and tool calls

MiniMax-M2.7 C

Best for Researchers and personal projects with a 4 to 8 GPU server who want an open agent and coding model with parallel tool calls

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

Watch for

Commercial use needs MiniMax's written authorisation since a licence swap on 11 April 2026, made without a note

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runLaguna S 2.1MiniMax-M2.7Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%257560Laguna S 2.1 +15
Risk20%205530Laguna S 2.1 +25
Agent interface10%108575Laguna S 2.1 +10
Documentation and upkeep10%104127Laguna S 2.1 +14
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 56.1/100

Facts side by side

FactLaguna S 2.1MiniMax-M2.7
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorPoolsideMiniMax
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceOpenMDW-1.1MiniMax M2.7 non-commercial licence (MIT-style terms, commercial use needs MiniMax's written authorisation)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-08-192026-04-20
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 reviews2.3/5 (4)1.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Laguna S 2.1

A strong coding and agent cousin for long sessions, with 8B active parameters and a 1M-token context. At 4-bit it needs a 96 to 128 GB machine, tight on a 128 GB one. The main risks are that nobody at Poolside answers its many reports, there are no safety results, and a build card misdescribes its file.

MiniMax-M2.7

A 230B mixture-of-experts model for coding and agent harnesses, with parallel tool calls, about 200K of context and parsers in vLLM and SGLang. It needs a 4 GPU server for FP8 or about 166 GB for a 4-bit library build, and it always thinks. The main risk is the licence, switched to non-commercial two days after release.

Before you call either

Laguna S 2.1

  1. Quickest start is ollama run laguna-s-2.1, 96 GB for the default Q4_K_M, or the 66 GB nvfp4 tag on Apple Silicon
  2. On our reference machine try llama-server -hf poolside/Laguna-S-2.1-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja -c 65536, from a llama.cpp release with the laguna architecture (b11772 has it). The 96 GB file leaves little room for context in 107.4 GB
  3. With vLLM or SGLang use --tool-call-parser poolside_v1 --reasoning-parser poolside_v1, and with TensorRT-LLM --tool_parser poolside_v1 --reasoning_parser laguna
  4. Thinking is on by default in the template, pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false to turn it off, and keep reasoning_content from earlier turns
  5. The GGUFs ship set to 262,144 tokens. For 1M with llama.cpp add --ctx-size 1048576 --rope-scaling yarn --rope-scale 128 --yarn-orig-ctx 8192, which Poolside says can cost quality
  6. Sampling per the generation config is temperature 1.0 and top_k 20, and Poolside suggests temperature 0.7 and top_p 0.95 at 1M
  7. Expect occasional tool-schema slips in harnesses unlike Poolside's own, and validate JSON arguments, which Poolside lists as known limitations

MiniMax-M2.7

  1. Check the use is personal, research or non-profit before starting it; anything commercial needs MiniMax's written authorisation, and commercial users must show Built with MiniMax M2.7
  2. Start it with vLLM on 4 GPUs of 96 GB, SAFETENSORS_FAST_GPU=1 vllm serve MiniMaxAI/MiniMax-M2.7 --trust-remote-code --tensor-parallel-size 4 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser minimax_m2 --reasoning-parser minimax_m2_append_think
  3. In SGLang use --tool-call-parser minimax-m2 and --reasoning-parser minimax-append-think, with --trust-remote-code
  4. MiniMax's guides budget 220 GB for the weights and 240 GB per 1M tokens of KV cache, with 196K the most per sequence
  5. On one large-memory machine, LM Studio's catalogue entry minimax/minimax-m2.7 lists a 138 GB Q4_K_M GGUF and states 138 GB minimum memory
  6. Sample with temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 40, as the card recommends, and budget output tokens for thinking on every turn
  7. Pin Transformers 4.57.1 as MiniMax's guide does; a report that it fails on Transformers v5 has no answer
  8. Without the hardware, call it through Novita, Featherless AI or DeepInfra; MiniMax's own API retires M2.7 on 18 November 2026

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Laguna S 2.1 or MiniMax-M2.7?

Laguna S 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M2.7's 56.1 (C), and leads in every scored category.

Other comparisons with Laguna S 2.1 or MiniMax-M2.7

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.