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

LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M3.1-Flash's 54.3 (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

LFM3-VL-2B C

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 55
  • Risk, 40 against 35
  • Agent interface, 90 against 70
  • Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 41

Watch for

vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash C

Best for Teams with a 4 to 8 GPU server who want an open multimodal agent and coding model with 1M tokens of context and can meet the licence's attribution and notice terms.

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

SGLang's cookbook still points to a pull request or a dev image on 4 November 2026, and vLLM's recipe still names a nightly image, though both runtimes' releases carry the model code

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 +36

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-M3.1-Flash 41

The model card earns 11, missing limitations, languages and a knowledge cut-off. Training data earns nothing, as it isn't described. The last change earns 20, an evaluation-results commit of 30 October 2026 after the release commit of 23 October. Responsiveness earns nothing, with no MiniMax reply in nine discussions opened from 23 to 31 October. Version policy earns 5 for a first release in its own repository. File health earns 5, for the tokenizer's 40,960,000-token model_max_length against the 1M context, the Transformers library tag against the card, and an unanswered vLLM streaming report. 11 + 0 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 41.

Reach LFM3-VL-2B +30

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-M3.1-Flash 55

Memory earns nothing. MiniMax's only build is its 250 GB NVFP4 and MXFP8 release, about 300 GB with the fifth added, above 256 GB, and no runtime library has a local build. Runtimes earn 20. llama.cpp from b11861 runs it, Ollama v0.40.14 pins llama.cpp b11963 with the minimax-m3 architecture, vLLM v0.33.0 (tagged 1 November 2026) registers the architecture and meets its recipe's minimum version, and SGLang v0.5.23 (tagged 29 October) registers it with M3.1 processor code and tests, though its cookbook still points to a pull request. Transformers support is in progress per the card and LM Studio has no entry. Builds earn 10 for one publisher precision. Terms earn 10, since commercial use is free with attribution and a notice below $20M of yearly revenue. Download earns 10, with no gate. Hosted earns 5, since MiniMax's API and Novita serve it. 0 + 20 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 55.

Agent interface LFM3-VL-2B +20

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-M3.1-Flash 70

The chat template earns 20 for chat_template.jinja in the repository. The tool-calling format earns 10, since only the template shows the format and the parsers come from vLLM's and SGLang's own docs. Trained tool calling earns 20, with several invoke blocks in one call. Structured output earns nothing, as it isn't documented. Reasoning control earns 10, with reasoning_effort per request on the card and the reasoning in mm:think tags. Context earns 10 for 1,048,576 tokens with no position scaling.

Risk LFM3-VL-2B +5

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-M3.1-Flash 35

File safety earns 15, safetensors only, less 10 because the SGLang route the card links passes trust_remote_code for the repository's configuration and processor code. 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; the launch post's security testing measured offensive capability, and the template's root role isn't documented as a trained hierarchy. Licence risk earns 5, after the military-use ban and the $20M threshold. The security programme earns nothing, with no security.txt, disclosure policy or advisories.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runLFM3-VL-2BMiniMax-M3.1-FlashEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258555LFM3-VL-2B +30
Risk20%204035LFM3-VL-2B +5
Agent interface10%109070LFM3-VL-2B +20
Documentation and upkeep10%107741LFM3-VL-2B +36
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 54.3/100

Facts side by side

FactLFM3-VL-2BMiniMax-M3.1-Flash
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorLiquid AIMiniMax
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceLFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue)MiniMax Community License (custom; commercial use needs a "Built with MiniMax M3.1-Flash" line and a one-time notice to MiniMax, and MiniMax's written authorisation above $20M yearly revenue)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtyesno
Last release2026-11-092026-10-23
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone2.3/5 (4)

How the scores have moved

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-M3.1-Flash

A 428B mixture-of-experts model, 23B active, for agent work, coding and computer use, with image and video input, about 1M tokens of context and parallel tool calls. It needs a 4 to 8 GPU server for 250 GB of NVFP4 and MXFP8 weights. vLLM 0.33.0 and SGLang 0.5.23 carry its code. Commercial use needs attribution and notice.

Before you call either

LFM3-VL-2B

  1. Start it with llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-VL-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja or ollama run lfm3-vl, with llama.cpp b11960 or later
  2. Use temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition penalty 1.1, per the card
  3. Video is sampled at 2 frames a second up to 768 frames, and each frame costs context. Video input in llama.cpp needs ffmpeg
  4. Don't plan on vLLM or SGLang until a release carries LFM3-VL
  5. Validate JSON output yourself
  6. Liquid doesn't recommend it for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning

MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

  1. Check the use case first; commercial products must show "Built with MiniMax M3.1-Flash" and notify MiniMax once, or get written authorisation above $20M yearly revenue
  2. On 8 H100 or H200 GPUs use vLLM 0.33.0 or later, or the recipe's image vllm/vllm-openai:minimax-m31-flash, with --tensor-parallel-size 8 --block-size 128 --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --moe-backend marlin --max-model-len 262144
  3. Pass --reasoning-parser minimax_m3 --tool-call-parser minimax_m3 --enable-auto-tool-choice in vLLM, or minimax-m3 for both in SGLang with --trust-remote-code
  4. --block-size 128 is mandatory in vLLM, since MSA's sparse block size is 128
  5. Set effort per request with chat_template_kwargs reasoning_effort (low, medium, high, xhigh, max); sample at temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95
  6. On Blackwell or MI355X, 4 GPUs serve it with the DSpark draft from dspark/; vLLM's Hopper command leaves DSpark off and turns video input off
  7. For GGUF builds by others, use llama.cpp b11861 or later; earlier builds mis-scale the NVFP4 experts and produce garbage
  8. Without the hardware, call MiniMax-M3.1-Flash on MiniMax's API (minimax-api), whose thinking defaults to max effort

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, LFM3-VL-2B or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash?

LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against MiniMax-M3.1-Flash's 54.3 (C), and leads in every scored category.

Other comparisons with LFM3-VL-2B or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash

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.