Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LBS-27B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
LFM3-Omni-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 55.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on risk. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
LBS-27B C
Best for Agents with about 96 GB of GPU memory that need to find click targets on dense professional screenshots, or read fine detail in large images, and can run a small crop loop and wait for independent results.
Ahead on
- Risk, 50 against 40
Watch for
No independent benchmark result yet; ScreenSpot-Pro, OS-World-G, PerceptionBench and HR-Bench numbers are inclusionAI's own runs
Best for Voice and camera agents on a laptop or phone that want one small model for hearing, seeing, speaking and calling tools
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 49 against 43
Watch for
Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Reach LFM3-Omni-2B +20
LBS-27B 60
Memory earns 10, since the only build is 54.73 GB of BF16, about 66 GB with a fifth added, which fits the reference machine but not 64 GB. Runtimes earn 25 from released vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp, which all carry Qwen3.8-27B's architecture, and Ollama through the llama.cpp release it pins, so 25. Builds earn 0, as inclusionAI publishes no quantised build and the GGUF copies are bartowski's and mradermacher's. Terms earn 15 for Apache 2.0 with nothing added, on the weights and on the base. Download earns 10, with no gate. Hosted earns 0, as no provider or inclusionAI API serves it.
LFM3-Omni-2B 80
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.29 GB projector file, and 1.39 GB × 1.2 = 1.7 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 10, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture with the LFM3 vision and audio projectors and speech output (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242, with a realtime client example), and Ollama's library has an lfm3-omni entry. Builds 15, Liquid's GGUF repository holds Q4_0, Q4_K_M, Q8_0, F16 and BF16 files, and Liquid publishes 4-bit and 8-bit MLX builds and an ONNX repository, all in the LiquidAI organisation. Terms 10, the LFM Open License v1.0, a custom licence that lets anyone use it commercially for free below a threshold of $10M annual revenue. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its GGUF, MLX and ONNX repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, Liquid's own API lists lfm3-omni-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 80.
Risk LBS-27B +10
LBS-27B 50
File safety earns 15, safetensors only but with the documented route running the publisher's scripts to serve it and to write its system prompt. Provenance earns 15, inclusionAI's own organisation with a hash for every file. Safety evaluation and agent guidance earn 0, as nothing is published on either, prompt injection through screenshots included. Licence risk keeps all 15 under Apache 2.0. The security programme earns 5 for Ant Group's AntSRC, which isn't linked to the model.
LFM3-Omni-2B 40
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, files in the LiquidAI organisation, which Liquid's docs page for the model and its blog post link to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in Liquid's blog post for the LFM3 family, neither of which mentions safety testing. Agent guidance 0, Nothing on prompt injection, an instruction hierarchy, what refusals cover or safeguards to add. Licence risk 10, 15 less 5 for the $10M annual revenue threshold on commercial use. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 40.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-Omni-2B +6
LBS-27B 43
The model card earns 8, with intended use, one limitation and parameters, and no architecture, context, languages or cut-off. Training data earns 5 for a general description of synthetic GUI data with no cut-off. Last change earns 20 for 26 October 2026. Responsiveness earns 0, the one discussion unanswered. Version policy earns 5 for a first release. File health earns 5, as the config still sets an MTP layer the weights lack and the card names a reasoning setting the template refuses.
LFM3-Omni-2B 49
Model card 14, Intended use (one on-device model in place of separate speech recognition, vision, language and speech models), architecture, parameters (2.17B), context (32K) and the text and speech languages. Training data 5, the card has no training section. Last change 20, the last commit, on 3 November 2026, changed the card's navigation icons, seven days before this check, and the one before it, on 28 October, documented video frame rate and frame limits. Responsiveness 0, none of the 12 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 October to 9 November 2026) has a reply from a LiquidAI member. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 5, the card gives a 32K context while config.json gives the language model 128,000 positions and Liquid's API lists 128,000 for the hosted model, so the card and the files don't agree on context. 14 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 49.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LBS-27B | LFM3-Omni-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 80 | LFM3-Omni-2B +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 40 | LBS-27B +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 70 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 43 | 49 | LFM3-Omni-2B +6 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 55.8/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LBS-27B | LFM3-Omni-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | Liquid AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 (the card's metadata and licence section; the LICENSE file sits in the GitHub repository inclusionAI/UI-Venus on its LBS branch, not in the Hugging Face repository) | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-26 | 2026-11-03 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
How the scores have moved
LFM3-Omni-2B
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
LBS-27B
A 27B Qwen3.8 fine-tune for GUI grounding that zooms into screenshots over a few turns before naming a point, and inclusionAI says it also helps with fine detail in large images. It needs about 96 GB at BF16 and a client that runs its crop actions. Every result so far is inclusionAI's own, with no safety results or injection guidance.
LFM3-Omni-2B
One 2.17B model that sees, listens and talks on an 8 GB machine and turns spoken requests into tool calls. Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release. The context is 32K, it doesn't reason, Liquid hasn't answered a question on the repository, and there are no safety results or data sources.
Before you call either
LBS-27B
- Serve with
vllm serve inclusionAI/LBS-27B --tensor-parallel-size 4 --max-model-len 65536, which is what the card's wrapper script runs; keep the context at 32,768 or more for multi-turn images - Build the system prompt with
build_system_promptfrom the LBS branch'szoomin_grounding_protocol.py, send the screenshot afterimage_path: <name>, and don't passtools; the model answers in plain text - Parse
<action>crop_image(image_path=..., x1=..., y1=..., x2=..., y2=...)</action>, cut the crop yourself and return it with its mapping to the original image; allow at most two crops per turn and three per episode - Read the final answer as
[x.xx,y.yy]on a 0 to 1000 scale of the original image, and use your own executor to click - Pass
reasoning_effortasxhigh,mediumorlowonly, since the template raises an error forhigh, and don't count onthinking_budget, which the template ignores - Don't turn on MTP speculative decoding; the MTP weights aren't in the repository though config.json names one MTP layer
LFM3-Omni-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-Omni-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-omni - Greedy decoding for text. For speech use audio_temperature 0.4 and audio_repetition_penalty 1.2, per the card
- The context is 32K, and llama.cpp samples video at 2 frames a second up to 384 frames
- Parse tool calls yourself from the XML it returns
- It doesn't reason, so don't pass enable_thinking
- Validate JSON output yourself
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LBS-27B or LFM3-Omni-2B?
LFM3-Omni-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 55.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on risk.
Other comparisons with LBS-27B or LFM3-Omni-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Arete-27B vs LBS-27B
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Carbon-X vs LBS-27B
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LBS-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LBS-27B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Inkling-Small vs LBS-27B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Inkling vs LBS-27B
- Inkling vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LBS-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kimi K3 vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs LBS-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kronos vs LBS-27B
- Kronos vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-1.7B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LBS-27B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LBS-27B vs Mistral Large 4
- LBS-27B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LBS-27B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LBS-27B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LBS-27B vs occamy-1.0
- LBS-27B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LBS-27B vs Recursive Flint
- LBS-27B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LBS-27B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LBS-27B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LBS-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LBS-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LBS-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LBS-27B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lbs-27b-vs-lfm3-omni-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lbs-27b.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm3-omni-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lbs-27b lfm3-omni-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lbs-27b", "b": "lfm3-omni-2b"}at/mcp, no key