Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LBS-27B vs occamy-1.0
occamy-1.0 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3504 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
LBS-27B D
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.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
No independent benchmark result yet; ScreenSpot-Pro, OS-World-G, PerceptionBench and HR-Bench numbers are inclusionAI's own runs
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 55
- Risk, 55 against 50
- Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 43
Watch for
No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LBS-27B | occamy-1.0 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 85 | occamy-1.0 +30 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 55 | occamy-1.0 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 70 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 43 | 74 | occamy-1.0 +31 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 53.9/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LBS-27B | occamy-1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | 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 (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) | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-26 | 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 | none | 3/5 (4) |
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.
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
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
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, LBS-27B or occamy-1.0?
occamy-1.0 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories.
Other comparisons with LBS-27B or occamy-1.0
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs occamy-1.0
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs occamy-1.0
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs occamy-1.0
- Carbon-X vs LBS-27B
- Carbon-X vs occamy-1.0
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LBS-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs occamy-1.0
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs occamy-1.0
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-20b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs occamy-1.0
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling-Small vs LBS-27B
- Inkling-Small vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling vs LBS-27B
- Inkling vs occamy-1.0
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LBS-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs occamy-1.0
- Kimi K3 vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3 vs occamy-1.0
- Kolibri-1 vs LBS-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs occamy-1.0
- Kronos vs LBS-27B
- Kronos vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- LBS-27B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LBS-27B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- 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 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 Olmo 3 7B Think
- 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 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 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 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
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs occamy-1.0
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs occamy-1.0
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB 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 Recursive Flint
- 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)
- occamy-1.0 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lbs-27b-vs-occamy-1-0.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lbs-27b.json·/api/v1/tools/occamy-1-0.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lbs-27b occamy-1-0(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lbs-27b", "b": "occamy-1-0"}at/mcp, no key