Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LBS-27B vs Qwen3.6-27B
Qwen3.6-27B scores 67.2 (B) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on documentation and upkeep. 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.
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 43 against 36
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 open coding and tool-calling model with vision on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac, with plain licence terms.
Ahead on
- Reach, 90 against 55
- Risk, 55 against 50
Watch for
No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LBS-27B | Qwen3.6-27B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 90 | Qwen3.6-27B +35 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 55 | Qwen3.6-27B +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 70 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 43 | 36 | LBS-27B +7 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 53.9/100 | B 67.2/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LBS-27B | Qwen3.6-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | Alibaba (Qwen team) |
| 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 | 2026-04-22 |
| 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.
Qwen3.6-27B
A capable dense cousin for agentic coding and tool calls with images and video in, running in every major runtime. Ollama's 4-bit build needs about 22 GB, and three providers host it. The main risk is silence, with no safety results, no agent guidance, no answers in its repository and Qwen3.8-27B now ahead of it.
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
Qwen3.6-27B
- Quickest start is
ollama run qwen3.6:27b, about 18 GB of files with the vision projector - Alibaba's FP8 build with the card's parsers is
vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3.6-27B-FP8 --max-model-len 262144 --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, vllm 0.19.0 or later - Use the qwen3_coder tool parser, the template writes calls as function and parameter blocks inside tool_call
- Thinking is on by default, pass
"chat_template_kwargs": {"enable_thinking": false}for short tasks, and/thinkand/nothinkaren't supported "preserve_thinking": truein chat_template_kwargs keeps earlier reasoning in context, which helps long agent sessions but grows the prompt- Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 when thinking, and temperature 0.7, top_p 0.8, presence_penalty 1.5 without
- Keep at least 128K of context if you rely on thinking, and turn on YaRN only beyond 262,144 tokens
- Validate any JSON it returns or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
- Qwen3.8-27B (listed as qwen3-8-27b) is the newer model at this size on the same runtimes
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LBS-27B or Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3.6-27B scores 67.2 (B) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with LBS-27B or Qwen3.6-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.6-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Carbon-X vs LBS-27B
- Carbon-X vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LBS-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.6-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Inkling-Small vs LBS-27B
- Inkling-Small vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Inkling vs LBS-27B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.6-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LBS-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Kimi K3 vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs LBS-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Kronos vs LBS-27B
- Kronos vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- 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 occamy-1.0
- 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 Qwen3.6-35B-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 Qwen3.6-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-27B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.6-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lbs-27b-vs-qwen3-6-27b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lbs-27b.json·/api/v1/tools/qwen3-6-27b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lbs-27b qwen3-6-27b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lbs-27b", "b": "qwen3-6-27b"}at/mcp, no key