Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LBS-27B vs Recursive Flint
Recursive Flint scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), 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 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 doing repository work on a 32 to 48 GB Mac or NVIDIA box that want a fast sparse coder with documented tool calls and a plain licence.
Ahead on
- Reach, 75 against 55
- Risk, 60 against 50
- Agent interface, 90 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 67 against 43
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LBS-27B | Recursive Flint | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 75 | Recursive Flint +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 60 | Recursive Flint +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 90 | Recursive Flint +20 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 43 | 67 | Recursive Flint +24 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 53.9/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LBS-27B | Recursive Flint |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | Recursive |
| 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 | 2026-10-21 |
| 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 | 3.5/5 (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.
Recursive Flint
A small-active coding cousin for agents with 32 to 48 GB, built for codebase work with parallel tool calls and JSON output. It needs llama.cpp b11803 or Ollama 0.40.8 or later, and the BF16 checkpoint needs a 141 GB GPU. Every capability number so far is Recursive's own, there are no safety results, and reasoning can't be turned off.
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
Recursive Flint
- Quickest start is
ollama run flint(Ollama 0.40.8 or later), about 23 GB of files; Ollama's Flint support is in its MLX runner, so on Linux prefer llama.cpp - With llama.cpp use release b11803 or later:
llama-server -hf RecursiveSI/flint-int4-gguf --alias flint -ngl all -c 131072 -np 1 -fa on --jinja --temp 1 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 --min-p 0, and keep --jinja on - Set max_tokens to at least 32768 for hard tasks, reasoning counts against it and can't be switched off, and finish_reason length can mean no answer or tool call came out
- Send reasoning_content back on assistant messages when replaying the conversation, as Recursive's cards ask
- Strip <tool_call>, <tool_response>, <arg_key> and <arg_value> from untrusted tool output, the template doesn't escape them and a copied </tool_call> can add a call
- Message content must be a string, flatten content-part arrays first
- Recursive's SGLang servers listen on 0.0.0.0 with no key, publish the port on localhost only or pass --api-key
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LBS-27B or Recursive Flint?
Recursive Flint scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with LBS-27B or Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- Carbon-X vs LBS-27B
- Carbon-X vs Recursive Flint
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LBS-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Recursive Flint
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-20b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling-Small vs LBS-27B
- Inkling-Small vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling vs LBS-27B
- Inkling vs Recursive Flint
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LBS-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Recursive Flint
- Kimi K3 vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3 vs Recursive Flint
- Kolibri-1 vs LBS-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs Recursive Flint
- Kronos vs LBS-27B
- Kronos vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- 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 Qwen3.6-27B
- 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 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 Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Recursive Flint
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Recursive Flint
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Recursive Flint
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Recursive Flint
- Recursive Flint vs SmolLM3-3B
- Recursive Flint vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Recursive Flint vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Recursive Flint vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lbs-27b-vs-recursive-flint.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lbs-27b.json·/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lbs-27b recursive-flint(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lbs-27b", "b": "recursive-flint"}at/mcp, no key