Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LBS-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on agent interface. 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
- Agent interface, 70 against 60
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 on a 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac that want Qwen3.8-27B's skills with shorter thinking, for teams under US$1M revenue or research.
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 55
Watch for
Commercial use above US$1M gross annual revenue needs a separate licence
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LBS-27B | Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 80 | Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 50 | even |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 60 | LBS-27B +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 43 | 43 | even |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 53.9/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LBS-27B | Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | UkisAI |
| 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) | Swift Open License v1.0 (custom, not an OSI licence) on UkisAI's changes, free for commercial use below US$1M gross annual revenue with a separate Swift Enterprise License above it. Built on Qwen3.8-27B, whose Apache 2.0 still governs the base |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-26 | 2026-09-24 |
| Terms last updated | 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 | 2.3/5 (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.
Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
A Qwen3.8-27B cousin post-trained to think in fewer tokens, for coding and agent work with images in, that fits a 24 GB machine with UkisAI's own 4-bit builds. Commercial use is free only below US$1M revenue. The main risks are that nobody at UkisAI answers its discussions, and that the shorter thinking rests on UkisAI's own benchmarks.
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
Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Quickest start is
llama-server -hf ukisai/Swift-1.5-Qwen3.8-27B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 18.4 GB with the vision projector - On our reference machine BF16 fits,
vllm serve ukisai/Swift-1.5-Qwen3.8-27b --max-model-len 262144 --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder - The template is Qwen3.8-27B's, so
chat_template_kwargswithreasoning_effortlow, medium or xhigh (default) andenable_thinkingfalse work as on the base - UkisAI benchmarked it at temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 and presence_penalty 0, which is a reasonable starting point
- The MLX 4-bit build needs UkisAI's patched MLX-LM and has no image or video chat
- Check the licence before commercial use, it stops at US$1M gross annual revenue including affiliates
- MTP self-speculative decoding is available with the base's head, flags on the card
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LBS-27B or Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B?
Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. LBS-27B leads on agent interface.
Other comparisons with LBS-27B or Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Carbon-X vs LBS-27B
- Carbon-X vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LBS-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Inkling-Small vs LBS-27B
- Inkling-Small vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Inkling vs LBS-27B
- Inkling vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LBS-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Kimi K3 vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs LBS-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Kronos vs LBS-27B
- Kronos vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- 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 Qwen3.6-27B
- 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-Flash-Next
- LBS-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LBS-27B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- SmolLM3-3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lbs-27b-vs-swift-1-5-qwen3-8-27b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lbs-27b.json·/api/v1/tools/swift-1-5-qwen3-8-27b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lbs-27b swift-1-5-qwen3-8-27b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lbs-27b", "b": "swift-1-5-qwen3-8-27b"}at/mcp, no key