Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M2.5's 59 (C), and leads in every scored category. 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 robot that need to read screens, documents, images and video from a model under 2 GB at 4 bits
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 65
- Risk, 40 against 30
- Agent interface, 90 against 75
- Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 37
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself
Best for Teams with a 4 to 8 GPU server who want an open agent and coding model with parallel tool calls and can live with its use policy
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
230 GB in FP8, and about 155 GB for the smallest 4-bit library build, more than a 128 GB machine
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 LFM3-VL-2B +40
LFM3-VL-2B 77
Model card 17, Intended use (questions about video, documents, charts and app screens, finding objects, spatial reasoning), a limitation (not recommended for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning), architecture (language model, 14-layer vision encoder and projector), parameters (1.92B), context (128K) and 16 languages. Training data 5, A general description: the base's 22T tokens of pre-training with the kinds of data added since LFM2, then vision mid-training on image and video data, supervised fine-tuning, vision reinforcement learning and distillation. 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 20, Of the 5 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 to 31 October 2026), 3 have a reply from a LiquidAI member, which is most. 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_vl architecture, the 128,000-token context and the vision settings in processor_config.json. 17 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 77.
MiniMax-M2.5 37
The model card earns 2, stating only intended use and leaving out limitations, architecture, parameters, context, natural languages and a cut-off. Training data earns 5 for a general description with no cut-off. The last change earns 20, a card edit on 26 October 2026 (commit 2515a3ea, a link renamed from MiniMax Agent to MiniMax Code), 9 days before this check; the files, template and code are unchanged since February. Responsiveness earns 5, with a MiniMax reply in 2 of the 40 most recent discussions and none since April. Version policy earns 5, since earlier and later models sit in their own repositories without dated notes. File health earns nothing, because the card's licence metadata still contradicts the licence in the files and an FP8 output report still waits without a reply. 2+5+20+5+5+0 = 37.
Reach LFM3-VL-2B +20
LFM3-VL-2B 85
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.20 GB projector file, and 1.30 GB × 1.2 = 1.6 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 15, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture and the LFM3-VL projector (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242), Ollama's library has an lfm3-vl entry, and LM Studio's catalogue lists liquid/lfm3-vl-2b. 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-vl-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 85.
MiniMax-M2.5 65
Memory earns 5. MiniMax only publishes its 230 GB FP8 release, and the smallest build of 4-bit or better from a runtime's own library is LM Studio's MLX 4-bit at 128.7 GB, about 154 GB with the fifth added, so it needs more than our 107.4 GB machine and fits within 256 GB. Runtimes earn the full 25, with model code in released vLLM v0.33.0, SGLang v0.5.23, llama.cpp and Transformers, an LM Studio catalogue entry, and Ollama 0.40.14, whose pinned llama.cpp b11963 has the minimax-m2 architecture, though Ollama's library lists no build. Builds earn 10 for one publisher precision, the FP8 release. Terms earn 10 for a custom licence that allows free commercial use under a use policy. Download earns 10, with no gate or account. Hosted earns 5, since Novita and Featherless AI serve it through Hugging Face, while MiniMax's own API is closed to new users and retires it on 18 November 2026. 5+25+10+10+10+5 = 65.
Agent interface LFM3-VL-2B +15
LFM3-VL-2B 90
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (12,129 characters), with roles, images and video, 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 its fine-tuning mix included tool calling and agentic traces. Structured output 5, the card's vLLM and SGLang commands set a structured-output backend and its fine-tuning table has a JSON extraction notebook, but nothing says how to ask this model for JSON. Liquid's API guide documents response_format with lfm3-1.7b as its example. Reasoning control 10, Liquid's chat-template page documents enable_thinking=False in apply_chat_template for LFM3, with reasoning on by default inside think tags, and the card documents preserve_thinking and reports a no-thinking configuration in its benchmarks. Context 10, 128K tokens of input and output per the card, and max_position_embeddings 128000 for the language model in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 90.
MiniMax-M2.5 75
The chat template earns 20 for chat_template.jinja in the repository. The tool-calling format earns 25, as MiniMax's own guide documents how tools go in and how calls come back, gives a parsing function, and its deployment guides name the vLLM and SGLang parsers. Trained tool calling earns 20, with several invoke blocks in one call. Structured output earns nothing, since JSON output isn't documented or claimed. Reasoning control earns nothing, because thinking is always on with no documented way to turn it off or budget it. Context earns 10 for 196,608 tokens with no position scaling.
Risk LFM3-VL-2B +10
LFM3-VL-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.
MiniMax-M2.5 30
File safety earns 15, safetensors only with no pickle files, less 10 because every documented loading route passes trust_remote_code for the repository's Python. Provenance earns the full 15, files in the organisation MiniMax links to with a SHA-256 for each shard. Safety evaluation and agent guidance earn nothing, as MiniMax publishes neither. Licence risk earns nothing (read 21 October 2026). The Prohibited Uses Policy goes beyond the law, MiniMax can end the licence for any breach and replaced its terms three weeks after release, and that change on 6 March 2026 came with no dated note while the card still links to a deleted file. The security programme earns nothing, with no security.txt, disclosure policy, SECURITY.md or advisories, and only a general contact address on the card.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LFM3-VL-2B | MiniMax-M2.5 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 85 | 65 | LFM3-VL-2B +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 40 | 30 | LFM3-VL-2B +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 75 | LFM3-VL-2B +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 77 | 37 | LFM3-VL-2B +40 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 59/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LFM3-VL-2B | MiniMax-M2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Liquid AI | MiniMax |
| 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) | MiniMax Model License (model) and modified MIT (code) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-11-09 | 2026-02-12 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | none | 1.8/5 (4) |
How the scores have moved
LFM3-VL-2B
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
LFM3-VL-2B
A 1.92B vision model that reads images and video on an 8 GB machine, with a documented tool-call format and thinking. It runs today in llama.cpp, Ollama and LM Studio, while vLLM and SGLang support is still unreleased. Transformers needs repository code, and there are no safety results, security contact or data sources.
MiniMax-M2.5
MiniMax-M2.5 is a 230B mixture-of-experts model for coding and agent work, with parallel tool calls, a 196K context and parsers in vLLM and SGLang. It needs a 4-GPU server for FP8 or about 155 GB for a 4-bit build. The main risk is a licence replaced after release with a Prohibited Uses Policy while the card still says modified MIT.
Before you call either
LFM3-VL-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-VL-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-vl, with llama.cpp b11960 or later - Use temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition penalty 1.1, per the card
- Video is sampled at 2 frames a second up to 768 frames, and each frame costs context. Video input in llama.cpp needs ffmpeg
- Don't plan on vLLM or SGLang until a release carries LFM3-VL
- Validate JSON output yourself
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning
MiniMax-M2.5
- Start it with vLLM on 4 GPUs of 96 GB, SAFETENSORS_FAST_GPU=1 vllm serve MiniMaxAI/MiniMax-M2.5 --trust-remote-code --tensor-parallel-size 4 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser minimax_m2 --reasoning-parser minimax_m2_append_think
- In SGLang use --tool-call-parser minimax-m2 and --reasoning-parser minimax-append-think, with --trust-remote-code
- MiniMax's guides budget 220 GB for the weights and 240 GB per 1M tokens of KV cache
- On a single large-memory machine, LM Studio's catalogue entry minimax/minimax-m2.5 lists a Q4_K_M GGUF of 138 GB and an MLX 4-bit of 129 GB (Mac only), and LM Studio states 121 GB minimum memory
- Sample with temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 40, as the card recommends
- Budget output tokens for thinking on every turn, since the template always opens a think block
- Read LICENSE-MODEL, not the card's licence link, before shipping, and keep the required Notice text in every copy
- Without the hardware, call it through Novita or Featherless AI; MiniMax's own API retires M2.5 on 18 November 2026
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LFM3-VL-2B or MiniMax-M2.5?
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M2.5's 59 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with LFM3-VL-2B or MiniMax-M2.5
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Arete-27B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Carbon-X vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniMax-M2.5
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling-Small vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Inkling vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling vs MiniMax-M2.5
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-VL-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Kronos vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kronos vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-VL-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM5-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Mistral Large 4
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs occamy-1.0
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs SmolLM3-3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lfm3-vl-2b-vs-minimax-m2-5.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lfm3-vl-2b.json·/api/v1/tools/minimax-m2-5.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lfm3-vl-2b minimax-m2-5(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lfm3-vl-2b", "b": "minimax-m2-5"}at/mcp, no key