Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents that want a small local helper for tool calls, extraction and RAG on a laptop, phone or CPU, at organisations under the licence's revenue threshold
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 90
- Documentation and upkeep, 57 against 31
Watch for
Commercial use isn't licensed for organisations with $10M or more of annual revenue
Best for Local coding and terminal agents on a 24 to 32 GB GPU or a Mac, where a clear licence file and an answering publisher aren't required
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 85 against 75
Watch for
No LICENSE file though the card links one, and no notice for the Apache 2.0 Qwen3.5 and Gemma 4 work it builds on
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LFM2.5-2.6B | Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 90 | LFM2.5-2.6B +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 50 | even |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 85 | Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 57 | 31 | LFM2.5-2.6B +26 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 51.5/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LFM2.5-2.6B | Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Liquid AI | Ornith |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-09-22 | 2026-08-23 |
| 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 | 2.5/5 (4) | 2.3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
LFM2.5-2.6B
A small, fast cousin for tool calls, extraction and long-context steps on a laptop or phone. Liquid's own 4-bit build is 1.6 GB, and every common runtime runs it. It always thinks, isn't meant for coding or knowledge-heavy work, and organisations over $10M of revenue need another licence. There are no safety results or security contact.
Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
A mid-size coding and terminal-agent cousin with about 3B active parameters, XML tool calls that vLLM and SGLang parse and 262,144 tokens of context. It runs in about 24 GB from Ornith's MLX 4-bit build or 32 GB from its GGUF. The main risk is an absent publisher, with no licence file, safety results or replies to 35 reports.
Before you call either
LFM2.5-2.6B
- Quickest start is
ollama run LiquidAI/lfm2.5-2.6b, 1.7 GB, orllama-cli -hf LiquidAI/LFM2.5-2.6B-GGUF - With vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser lfm2; for vLLM add--reasoning-parser qwen3so the thinking comes back separately - Sample at temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition_penalty 1.1, as the card and generation_config.json set
- Put tools in the system prompt as
List of tools: [...]JSON, or pass tools to apply_chat_template; calls come back as a Python list of function calls, and the system prompt can ask for JSON calls instead - Leave max_tokens unset or generous, since a low cap cuts the reasoning off mid-thought
- Earlier thinking is dropped from the prompt unless
preserve_thinkingis true - Liquid's 328M LFM2.5-2.6B-DSpark drafter speeds decoding about 2.6 times in SGLang and on Apple silicon, per Liquid
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Start it with
ollama run ornith-1.5:35b, orllama-server -hf ornith-ai/Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B-GGUF --port 8000 -c 262144as the card gives it - In vLLM pass
--enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_xml --reasoning-parser qwen3, and in SGLang--tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser qwen3, so tool calls and reasoning come back parsed - Thinking is on by default. Send
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention - Pin which template your runtime loads, since chat_template.jinja keeps earlier reasoning and the tokenizer_config.json template drops it
- Use temperature 0.6, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 for general tasks and temperature 1.0 to reproduce the card's benchmarks
- Pin a revision when you download, since Ornith has replaced files in place, and add mmproj-Ornith-1.5-35B-BF16.gguf (0.9 GB) for image input in llama.cpp
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LFM2.5-2.6B or Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B?
Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with LFM2.5-2.6B or Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Inkling-Small vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Inkling vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Inkling vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kimi K3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lfm2-5-2-6b-vs-ornith-1-5-35b-a3b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lfm2-5-2-6b.json·/api/v1/tools/ornith-1-5-35b-a3b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lfm2-5-2-6b ornith-1-5-35b-a3b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lfm2-5-2-6b", "b": "ornith-1-5-35b-a3b"}at/mcp, no key