Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LFM3-1.7B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
LFM3-1.7B and MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B leads on reach and risk. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents on a laptop, phone or small server that need tool calling and a long context from a model under 2 GB at 4 bits
Ahead on
- Agent interface, 100 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 67 against 48
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang have no released support, though the card lists both
Best for Agents that need a cheap local model to read screenshots, photos and short video on a phone, a laptop or beside a bigger model
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 85
- Risk, 55 against 40
Watch for
No limitations section, safety results, agent-use guidance or security contact
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Agent interface LFM3-1.7B +30
LFM3-1.7B 100
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (12,129 characters), with roles, tools, deferred tools, tool results and the thinking switch. Tool-calling format 25, the card and Liquid's tool-use page document tools passed through tools= in apply_chat_template, calls returned as XML and results sent back as tool messages. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over every entry in an assistant turn's tool_calls, so several calls fit in one turn, and the card says the model was trained on tool calls and agentic traces and with reinforcement learning inside agent harnesses. Structured output 15, Liquid's API guide documents response_format with a JSON Schema, with lfm3-1.7b as the model in its examples, and says the schema is checked before generation starts. Reasoning control 10, the card documents enable_thinking=False in the chat template to turn reasoning off per request, with reasoning on by default inside think tags, and preserve_thinking for earlier turns. Context 10, 256K tokens per the card, which says the mid-training stage extended the context window to 256K, and max_position_embeddings 262144 in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 15 + 10 + 10 = 100.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 70
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository, 7,249 characters. Tool-calling format 10, the card shows tools declared in the OpenAI tools array in a request to Transformers' server, but not how a call comes back, and names no parser for vLLM or SGLang. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over tool_calls, so it renders several calls in one assistant turn, and the card gives a tool-calling request as a supported use. Structured output 0, Neither JSON nor JSON Schema output is documented or claimed for the model on the card. Reasoning control 10, the card passes enable_thinking per request in its examples, the template has been off by default since 19 October 2026, and the GGUF repository keeps thinking builds in their own folder. Context 10, 262,144 tokens, max_position_embeddings in the text config. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 70.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-1.7B +19
LFM3-1.7B 67
Model card 17, Intended use (local agents, tool calling, structured outputs, fine-tuning), a limitation (not recommended for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning), architecture (24 layers: 13 gated short convolutions, 5 sliding-window and 6 global attention), parameters (1.73B), context (256K) and 16 languages. Training data 5, A general description: 22T tokens of pre-training in two stages with the kinds of data added since LFM2, 1.75T tokens of supervised fine-tuning, then mixed reinforcement learning, distillation from six specialist teachers and agentic reinforcement learning. Last change 20, the last commit, on 9 November 2026, added the OpenVINO checkpoint to the card's inference table, a day before this check. Responsiveness 10, Of the 22 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 October to 8 November 2026), 7 have a reply from a LiquidAI member, which is some. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the lfm3 architecture, the 262,144-token context and the thinking switch. 17 + 5 + 20 + 10 + 5 + 10 = 67.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 48
Model card 8, Intended use (image, multi-image and video understanding on device), architecture (early visual-token compression inside the vision encoder) and parameters (1B) are there. Training data 0, no description of the training data on the card. Last change 20, the last commit, on 30 October 2026, updated the card and removed an unused asset folder, eleven days before this check. Responsiveness 0, the repository has no discussions that aren't pull requests (two pull requests in all), so nobody has asked anything yet and the line reads as none answered, as settled in calibration. Version policy 10, MiniCPM-V 4.5 and 4.6 stay in their own repositories and the GitHub README dates each release. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the thinking switch, and no report waits without a reply, since there are no discussions. 8 + 0 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 48.
Risk MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +15
LFM3-1.7B 40
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, files in the LiquidAI organisation, which Liquid's docs page for the model and its blog post link to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in Liquid's blog post for the LFM3 family, neither of which mentions safety testing. Agent guidance 0, Nothing on prompt injection, an instruction hierarchy, what refusals cover or safeguards to add. Licence risk 10, 15 less 5 for the $10M annual revenue threshold on commercial use. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 40.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 55
File safety 25, safetensors in the main repository and the AWQ, GPTQ and int4 builds, GGUF in the GGUF build, with no .bin, .pt, .pth or .py files in the main repository. Provenance 15, files in the openbmb organisation that OpenBMB's GitHub README links to (10), with a SHA-256 for both large files in the main repository (5). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations or disclaimer section, and no prompt-injection guidance, instruction hierarchy or statement of trained refusals. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, field-of-use limit, threshold or change clause, nothing is added on the card, and the LICENSE in OpenBMB's GitHub repository resolved on 10 November 2026. Security programme 0, no SECURITY.md in OpenBMB/MiniCPM-V and no security.txt on openbmb.cn (both 404 on 10 November 2026), and no advisories found. 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 55.
Reach MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +10
LFM3-1.7B 85
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB, and 1.10 GB × 1.2 = 1.3 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 15, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture (src/models/lfm3.cpp at b12242), Ollama's library has an lfm3 entry, and LM Studio's catalogue runs the architecture (its liquid/lfm3-vl-2b entry; lmstudio-community publishes a GGUF of this model). Builds 15, Liquid's GGUF repository holds Q4_0, Q4_K_M, Q8_0, F16 and BF16 files, and Liquid publishes 4-bit and 8-bit MLX builds and an ONNX repository, all in the LiquidAI organisation. Terms 10, the LFM Open License v1.0, a custom licence that lets anyone use it commercially for free below a threshold of $10M annual revenue. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its GGUF, MLX and ONNX repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, Liquid's own API lists lfm3-1.7b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 85.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 95
Memory 30, OpenBMB's own IQ4_XS GGUF is 0.64 GB, 1.54 GB with the 0.90 GB vision projector, and 1.54 GB × 1.2 = 1.9 GB, which fits 16 GB with room to spare. Runtimes 25, MiniCPMV4_7ForConditionalGeneration in vLLM's registry at v0.33.0, the minicpmv4_7 model type in SGLang's minicpmv.py at v0.5.23, the minicpmv4_7 model in Transformers at v5.22.2, a MiniCPM-V 4.7 guide and conversion code in llama.cpp at b12242, and an openbmb/minicpm-v4.7:1b tag in OpenBMB's namespace on Ollama, read as the 35B-A3B listing's is. Builds 15, OpenBMB publishes AWQ, GPTQ and int4 safetensors builds and a GGUF repository from IQ3_XS to F16, so quantised builds at two precisions or more. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata and as the LICENSE of OpenBMB's MiniCPM-V repository, an OSI licence. Download 10, gated is false on the main repository and on the GGUF, AWQ, GPTQ and int4 repositories, so the files download with no account or terms. Hosted 0, Hugging Face lists no inference provider for the model (an empty provider mapping on 10 November 2026), and no provider's own list was read. 30 + 25 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 95.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LFM3-1.7B | MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 85 | 95 | MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 40 | 55 | MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 100 | 70 | LFM3-1.7B +30 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 67 | 48 | LFM3-1.7B +19 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LFM3-1.7B | MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Liquid AI | OpenBMB |
| 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) | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-11-09 | 2026-10-30 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
Verdicts
LFM3-1.7B
A 1.73B model that fits an 8 GB machine with room to spare, with a documented tool-call format, deferred tools, a thinking switch and a 256K context. It runs today in llama.cpp, Ollama and LM Studio only, loads in Transformers through repository code, and has no safety results, security contact or data sources.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
A vision-language cousin small enough for a phone, under plain Apache 2.0, that every runtime we count can load. The projector is bigger than the language model, so plan for about 2 GB. The card says nothing about limits or training data and doesn't show how a tool call comes back.
Before you call either
LFM3-1.7B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-1.7B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3 - Use temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition penalty 1.1 for chat, tools and agents, per the card
- Pass
enable_thinking=Falsefor direct answers, and expect it to reason anyway on hard tasks - For a large tool catalogue mark tools
defer_loadingand give it a search tool - Don't plan on vLLM or SGLang until a release carries LFM3
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning
MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf openbmb/MiniCPM-V-4.7-1B-gguf:Q4_K_M --jinja, orollama run openbmb/minicpm-v4.7:1b - For image input in llama.cpp add
mmproj-model-f16.gguf, or the smaller 4x projector - The GGUF files at the repository root have thinking off. Use the files in
thinking/when you want the trace - Use temperature 0.7, top_p 0.95 and top_k 100 in instruct mode, as the card recommends
- Check tool calls in your runtime first, since the card names no parser
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LFM3-1.7B or MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B?
LFM3-1.7B and MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B leads on reach and risk.
Other comparisons with LFM3-1.7B or MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-1.7B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Arete-27B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-1.7B
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-1.7B
- Carbon-X vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-1.7B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-1.7B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-1.7B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-1.7B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-1.7B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-1.7B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-1.7B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-1.7B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-1.7B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-1.7B
- gpt-oss-20b vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-1.7B
- Inkling-Small vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Inkling vs LFM3-1.7B
- Inkling vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-1.7B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-1.7B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Kimi K3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Kronos vs LFM3-1.7B
- Kronos vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-1.7B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-1.7B
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-1.7B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-1.7B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-1.7B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-1.7B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-1.7B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-1.7B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-1.7B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-1.7B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-1.7B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-1.7B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Mistral Large 4
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs SmolLM3-3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lfm3-1-7b-vs-minicpm-v-4-7-1b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lfm3-1-7b.json·/api/v1/tools/minicpm-v-4-7-1b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lfm3-1-7b minicpm-v-4-7-1b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lfm3-1-7b", "b": "minicpm-v-4-7-1b"}at/mcp, no key