Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores 61.8 (C) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 5 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach, risk, agent interface 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

LFM2.5-2.6B D

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 65
  • Risk, 50 against 45
  • Agent interface, 75 against 70
  • Documentation and upkeep, 57 against 36

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.5 against 2.0 out of 5

Watch for

Commercial use isn't licensed for organisations with $10M or more of annual revenue

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next C

Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server or a 128 GB Mac who want Qwen's newest sparse architecture for agentic coding and multimodal work, and aren't a hosted-model or coding-assistant business.

Ahead on

  • Capability, 74 against 13

Watch for

No build fits the reference machine's 107.4 GB, and Ollama's smallest Linux build is 120 GB

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runLFM2.5-2.6BQwen3.8-Flash-NextEdge
Capability35%351374Qwen3.8-Flash-Next +61
Reach25%259565LFM2.5-2.6B +30
Risk20%205045LFM2.5-2.6B +5
Agent interface10%107570LFM2.5-2.6B +5
Documentation and upkeep10%105736LFM2.5-2.6B +21
Negative events≤1500
TotalD 51.5/100C 61.8/100

Facts side by side

FactLFM2.5-2.6BQwen3.8-Flash-Next
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorLiquid AIAlibaba (Qwen team)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceLFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue)Qwen Community License 1.0 (custom, not an OSI licence). Free of charge, the model name shown in products above 100M monthly users or US$20M monthly revenue, and a separate licence from Qwen before commercial use by a Model as a Service or AI Work Assistant business
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtyesno
Last release2026-09-222026-08-31
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno 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 reviews2.5/5 (4)2/5 (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.

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

A large sparse cousin with 6B active parameters for agentic coding and multimodal work, previewing Qwen's next architecture. It needs a 128 GB Mac for Ollama's MLX build or about 144 GB for the 4-bit GGUF, and Qwen Cloud serves it. The main risk is a licence that needs a separate deal for hosted-model and coding or office assistant businesses.

Before you call either

LFM2.5-2.6B

  1. Quickest start is ollama run LiquidAI/lfm2.5-2.6b, 1.7 GB, or llama-cli -hf LiquidAI/LFM2.5-2.6B-GGUF
  2. With vLLM or SGLang pass --tool-call-parser lfm2; for vLLM add --reasoning-parser qwen3 so the thinking comes back separately
  3. Sample at temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition_penalty 1.1, as the card and generation_config.json set
  4. 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
  5. Leave max_tokens unset or generous, since a low cap cuts the reasoning off mid-thought
  6. Earlier thinking is dropped from the prompt unless preserve_thinking is true
  7. Liquid's 328M LFM2.5-2.6B-DSpark drafter speeds decoding about 2.6 times in SGLang and on Apple silicon, per Liquid
  8. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

  1. On a 128 GB Mac start it with ollama run qwen3.8-flash-next:125b-mlx (105 GB, NVFP4), on Linux the smallest Ollama build is qwen3.8-flash-next:125b-a6b-q4_K_M at 120 GB, which won't fit a 107.4 GB GPU share
  2. On a server, vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3.8-Flash-Next-FP8 --tensor-parallel-size 4 --max-model-len 262144 --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder
  3. Use the qwen3_coder tool parser and the qwen3 reasoning parser, as Qwen's GitHub README does
  4. Thinking is on by default, pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false to skip it, and read the reasoning from reasoning_content, even though SGLang's cookbook says thinking can't be turned off
  5. reasoning_effort takes xhigh (default), medium or low, and any other value makes the template raise an error
  6. Send at most one system message and put it first, since the template raises an error otherwise
  7. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 when thinking, temperature 0.7, top_p 0.8 and presence_penalty 1.5 without
  8. vLLM keeps the 51B n-gram table in host memory on 80 GB GPUs by default, per its recipe
  9. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
  10. Read the Qwen Community License before serving it to others as an API or inside a coding or office assistant product

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, LFM2.5-2.6B or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores 61.8 (C) on agent readiness against LFM2.5-2.6B's 51.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 5 scored categories. LFM2.5-2.6B leads on reach, risk, agent interface and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with LFM2.5-2.6B or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.