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

Laguna S 2.1 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna S 2.1's 61 (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.

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

Watch for

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

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B B

Best for Agents on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac that want a fast tool-calling reasoning model with long context and a permissive licence

Ahead on

  • Reach, 85 against 75
  • Risk, 75 against 55
  • Agent interface, 90 against 85
  • Documentation and upkeep, 70 against 41

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.0 against 2.3 out of 5

Watch for

No safety evaluation results published

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runLaguna S 2.1Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%257585Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B +10
Risk20%205575Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B +20
Agent interface10%108590Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B +5
Documentation and upkeep10%104170Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B +29
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100B 64.2/100

Facts side by side

FactLaguna S 2.1Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorPoolsideNVIDIA
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceOpenMDW-1.1OpenMDW-1.1
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-08-192026-08-11
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)3/5 (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.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B

A small agent cousin, 3B active parameters, with trained parallel tool calls, a thinking switch and up to 1M tokens of context, under a permissive licence. It runs in about 23 GB from the GGUF or Ollama builds, and NVIDIA's NVFP4 build needs NVIDIA GPUs. The main risks are no published safety results and one answered question across two repositories.

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

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B

  1. Quickest start is ollama run nemotron-3.5-lightning, about 19 to 25 GB of files depending on the platform
  2. On the reference machine use llama-server -hf ggml-org/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Lightning-30B-A3B-GGUF:Q4_0 --jinja, since the card's Q4_K_M tag doesn't exist there and NVFP4 needs NVIDIA GPUs
  3. With vLLM serve it with --reasoning-parser nemotron_v3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder (SGLang uses --reasoning-parser nemotron_3)
  4. Use temperature=1.0 and top_p=0.95, as the card says
  5. Thinking is on by default. Pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks
  6. For coding agents pass force_nonempty_content: true in chat_template_kwargs, which vLLM's nemotron_v3 parser reads so a cut-off reasoning trace still returns content
  7. Go past 262,144 tokens only with the card's flags (VLLM_ALLOW_LONG_MAX_MODEL_LEN=1, --max-model-len 1048576) and enough memory

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Laguna S 2.1 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Laguna S 2.1's 61 (C), and leads in every scored category.

Other comparisons with Laguna S 2.1 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B

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.