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

Laguna XS 2.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B

Laguna XS 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Nemotron 3 Nano 4B's 56.8 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Nemotron 3 Nano 4B leads on reach, risk 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

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

  • Agent interface, 85 against 70

Watch for

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

Nemotron 3 Nano 4B C

Best for Agents on laptops, edge boards and small GPUs that need a cheap local tool-calling helper in English

Ahead on

  • Reach, 90 against 85
  • Risk, 65 against 55
  • Documentation and upkeep, 55 against 46

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.3 against 2.8 out of 5

Watch for

The card's Transformers and vLLM commands pass trust_remote_code and load a parser plugin from the repository

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runLaguna XS 2.1Nemotron 3 Nano 4BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258590Nemotron 3 Nano 4B +5
Risk20%205565Nemotron 3 Nano 4B +10
Agent interface10%108570Laguna XS 2.1 +15
Documentation and upkeep10%104655Nemotron 3 Nano 4B +9
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 56.8/100

Facts side by side

FactLaguna XS 2.1Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorPoolsideNVIDIA
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceOpenMDW-1.1NVIDIA Nemotron Open Model License
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-08-192026-03-16
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 reviews2.8/5 (4)3.3/5 (4)

Verdicts

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.

Nemotron 3 Nano 4B

A tiny reasoning cousin with trained tool calls, a thinking switch and 262,144 tokens of context, running in about 4 GB from NVIDIA's own GGUF on almost any machine. The main risks are serving commands that run repository code, no published safety results, a tool format left to the template, and files untouched and questions unanswered since March.

Before you call either

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

Nemotron 3 Nano 4B

  1. Quickest start is ollama run nemotron-3-nano:4b, a 2.8 GB build
  2. With llama.cpp use llama-server -hf nvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-4B-GGUF --jinja, NVIDIA's own Q4_K_M file
  3. With vLLM, download nano_v3_reasoning_parser.py from the repository first and serve with --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser-plugin nano_v3_reasoning_parser.py --reasoning-parser nano_v3
  4. The card's Transformers snippet names nvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-4B, use nvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-4B-BF16 instead
  5. Thinking is on by default. Pass enable_thinking=False to the chat template for short tasks
  6. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 for reasoning and temperature 0.6 with top_p 0.95 for tool calling, as the card says
  7. It's tuned for English only, and validate JSON yourself, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Laguna XS 2.1 or Nemotron 3 Nano 4B?

Laguna XS 2.1 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Nemotron 3 Nano 4B's 56.8 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Nemotron 3 Nano 4B leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Laguna XS 2.1 or Nemotron 3 Nano 4B

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.