Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LFM3-Omni-2B vs occamy-1.0
LFM3-Omni-2B and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 leads on reach, risk 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 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Voice and camera agents on a laptop or phone that want one small model for hearing, seeing, speaking and calling tools
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release
Best for Agents that want an Apache 2.0 mixture-of-experts model tuned for long tool-using tasks on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac.
Ahead on
- Reach, 90 against 80
- Risk, 55 against 40
- Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 49
Watch for
No safety results, prompt-injection 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.
Documentation and upkeep occamy-1.0 +25
LFM3-Omni-2B 49
Model card 14, Intended use (one on-device model in place of separate speech recognition, vision, language and speech models), architecture, parameters (2.17B), context (32K) and the text and speech languages. Training data 5, the card has no training section. Last change 20, the last commit, on 3 November 2026, changed the card's navigation icons, seven days before this check, and the one before it, on 28 October, documented video frame rate and frame limits. Responsiveness 0, none of the 12 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 October to 9 November 2026) has a reply from a LiquidAI member. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 5, the card gives a 32K context while config.json gives the language model 128,000 positions and Liquid's API lists 128,000 for the hosted model, so the card and the files don't agree on context. 14 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 49.
occamy-1.0 74
Model card 14 of 20, languages and a knowledge cut-off are missing. Training data 15, the mix by type with token counts, the method and a published subset, without a cut-off. Last change 20, Accio's GGUF build card changed on 19 October 2026 and the main card on 2 October. Responsiveness 10, Accio answered 4 of 9 questions. Version policy 5, a first release with no files replaced. File health 10, the files agree with the card. 14 + 15 + 20 + 10 + 5 + 10 = 74.
Risk occamy-1.0 +15
LFM3-Omni-2B 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.
occamy-1.0 55
File safety 25, safetensors only and nothing from the repository runs to load it or build prompts. Provenance 15, the files are in the organisation Accio's GitHub links, with MD5 sums and SHA-256 for every file. Safety evaluation 0, none published. Agent guidance 0. Licence risk 15, plain Apache 2.0 that hasn't changed. Security programme 0, bug reports go to public GitHub issues and there's no security contact.
Reach occamy-1.0 +10
LFM3-Omni-2B 80
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.29 GB projector file, and 1.39 GB × 1.2 = 1.7 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 10, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture with the LFM3 vision and audio projectors and speech output (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242, with a realtime client example), and Ollama's library has an lfm3-omni entry. 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-omni-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 80.
occamy-1.0 90
Memory 25 of 30, Accio's MLX mxfp4 build is 18.4 GB, 22.1 GB with a fifth added, and its IQ4_XS GGUF needs 22.5 GB, both within 24 GB. Runtimes 25, the most the line gives, it keeps the base's qwen3_5_moe architecture, which llama.cpp, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers run in released versions, and Ollama v0.40.14 builds a llama.cpp (b11963) that has it. Builds 15, FP8, NVFP4, GGUF and MLX from Accio. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 like its base. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, no API or inference provider serves it. 25 + 25 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 90.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LFM3-Omni-2B | occamy-1.0 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 80 | 90 | occamy-1.0 +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 40 | 55 | occamy-1.0 +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 70 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 49 | 74 | occamy-1.0 +25 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LFM3-Omni-2B | occamy-1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Liquid AI | Accio (Accio-Lab) |
| 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 | 2026-11-03 | 2026-10-02 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | none | 3/5 (4) |
How the scores have moved
LFM3-Omni-2B
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
LFM3-Omni-2B
One 2.17B model that sees, listens and talks on an 8 GB machine and turns spoken requests into tool calls. Only llama.cpp and Ollama run it in a release. The context is 32K, it doesn't reason, Liquid hasn't answered a question on the repository, and there are no safety results or data sources.
occamy-1.0
A Qwen3.6-35B-A3B fine-tuned for long agent work with tools, files and code, under plain Apache 2.0, and Accio's 4-bit builds run in about 23 GB. The main gaps are no safety results, agent guidance or security contact, and every benchmark figure is Accio's own.
Before you call either
LFM3-Omni-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-Omni-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-omni - Greedy decoding for text. For speech use audio_temperature 0.4 and audio_repetition_penalty 1.2, per the card
- The context is 32K, and llama.cpp samples video at 2 frames a second up to 384 frames
- Parse tool calls yourself from the XML it returns
- It doesn't reason, so don't pass enable_thinking
- Validate JSON output yourself
occamy-1.0
- Serve with
--reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coderon vLLM 0.19.0 or SGLang 0.5.10 and later - BF16 is 70.2 GB, so on a 128 GB machine run it without the card's 8-way tensor parallelism
- Keep the whole assistant message, reasoning and tool calls included, in later turns, as the card says
- Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 and presence_penalty 1.5
- With the GGUFs, NFC-normalise input text and read TOKENIZER.md, since the files store qwen2 pre-tokenizer metadata
- The base's MTP layer isn't in this checkpoint, Accio-Lab/occamy-1.0-MTP is an experimental separate head
- Ollama has no Occamy library entry, so load Accio's GGUF in Ollama 0.40.14 or later, which builds a llama.cpp with the qwen35moe architecture
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LFM3-Omni-2B or occamy-1.0?
LFM3-Omni-2B and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with LFM3-Omni-2B or occamy-1.0
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs occamy-1.0
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs occamy-1.0
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Arete-27B vs occamy-1.0
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs occamy-1.0
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Carbon-X vs occamy-1.0
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs occamy-1.0
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs occamy-1.0
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs occamy-1.0
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs occamy-1.0
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs occamy-1.0
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Hy3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Hy3 vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Inkling-Small vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Inkling vs occamy-1.0
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs occamy-1.0
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs occamy-1.0
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kimi K3 vs occamy-1.0
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs occamy-1.0
- Kronos vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Kronos vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs occamy-1.0
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LBS-27B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- LFM3-VL-2B vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs occamy-1.0
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM5-2B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs occamy-1.0
- Mistral Large 4 vs occamy-1.0
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs occamy-1.0
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs occamy-1.0
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs occamy-1.0
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs occamy-1.0
- occamy-1.0 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- occamy-1.0 vs SmolLM3-3B
- occamy-1.0 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- occamy-1.0 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- occamy-1.0 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- occamy-1.0 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lfm3-omni-2b-vs-occamy-1-0.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lfm3-omni-2b.json·/api/v1/tools/occamy-1-0.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lfm3-omni-2b occamy-1-0(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lfm3-omni-2b", "b": "occamy-1-0"}at/mcp, no key