Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LFM3-VL-2B vs Recursive Flint
LFM3-VL-2B and Recursive Flint score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Recursive Flint leads on 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 robot that need to read screens, documents, images and video from a model under 2 GB at 4 bits
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 67
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself
Best for Agents doing repository work on a 32 to 48 GB Mac or NVIDIA box that want a sparse coder with documented tool calls and a plain licence.
Ahead on
- Risk, 60 against 40
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
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.
Risk Recursive Flint +20
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.
Recursive Flint 60
File safety 15 of 25, safetensors and GGUF only, but the card's documented BF16 route installs the wheel shipped in the repository. Provenance 15, the files are in the RecursiveSI organisation that Recursive's own engine downloads from, with a checksum on every file. Safety evaluation 0, none on the cards or in the announcement post. Agent guidance 10, the card and serving README say to enforce permissions around tool use and to strip tool tags from untrusted tool output, but there's no trained instruction hierarchy. Licence risk 15, plain Apache 2.0. Security programme 5, a reporting address on the card and a private reporting route for the engine, with no public advisories yet.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-VL-2B +10
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.
Recursive Flint 67
Model card 17 of 20, everything but languages. Training data 10, a general description of the mix with a June 2026 cut-off. Last change 20, released 13 days ago. Responsiveness 5, Recursive answered one of 31 discussions, on release day. Version policy 5, a first release. File health 10, the files agree with each other and the card, and no broken-file report waits.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LFM3-VL-2B | Recursive Flint | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 85 | 85 | even |
| Risk | 20%20 | 40 | 60 | Recursive Flint +20 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 90 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 77 | 67 | LFM3-VL-2B +10 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LFM3-VL-2B | Recursive Flint |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Liquid AI | Recursive |
| 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 | 2026-10-21 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | none | 3.5/5 (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.
Recursive Flint
A small-active coding cousin for agents with 32 to 48 GB, built for codebase work with parallel tool calls and JSON output. Released llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM and Transformers run it, while Recursive's free OpenRouter endpoint wasn't serving on 3 November 2026. Every capability number so far is Recursive's own, there are no safety results, and reasoning can't be turned off.
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
Recursive Flint
- Quickest start is
ollama run flint(Ollama 0.40.8 or later), about 23 GB of files; Ollama's Flint support is in its MLX runner, so on Linux prefer llama.cpp - With llama.cpp use release b11803 or later:
llama-server -hf RecursiveSI/flint-int4-gguf --alias flint -ngl all -c 131072 -np 1 -fa on --jinja --temp 1 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 --min-p 0, and keep --jinja on - Set max_tokens to at least 32768 for hard tasks, reasoning counts against it and can't be switched off, and finish_reason length can mean no answer or tool call came out
- Send reasoning_content back on assistant messages when replaying the conversation, as Recursive's cards ask
- Strip <tool_call>, <tool_response>, <arg_key> and <arg_value> from untrusted tool output, the template doesn't escape them and a copied </tool_call> can add a call
- Message content must be a string, flatten content-part arrays first
- Recursive's SGLang servers listen on 0.0.0.0 with no key, publish the port on localhost only or pass --api-key
- Check OpenRouter's endpoints list before calling recursive/flint-v1.0:free, since its only endpoint (Recursive, BF16) showed 0 per cent uptime over the last day on 3 November 2026
- vLLM needs v0.33.0 or later and Transformers v5.21 or later; released SGLang has no Flint model
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LFM3-VL-2B or Recursive Flint?
LFM3-VL-2B and Recursive Flint score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Recursive Flint leads on risk.
Other comparisons with LFM3-VL-2B or Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Arete-27B vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Carbon-X vs Recursive Flint
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Recursive Flint
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling-Small vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling vs Recursive Flint
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-VL-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Recursive Flint
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Recursive Flint
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3 vs Recursive Flint
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs Recursive Flint
- Kronos vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kronos vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Recursive Flint
- 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-M2.5
- 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 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 Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Recursive Flint
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- Mistral Large 4 vs Recursive Flint
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Recursive Flint
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Recursive Flint
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-122B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Recursive Flint
- Recursive Flint vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Recursive Flint vs SmolLM3-3B
- Recursive Flint vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Recursive Flint vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Recursive Flint vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lfm3-vl-2b-vs-recursive-flint.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lfm3-vl-2b.json·/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lfm3-vl-2b recursive-flint(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lfm3-vl-2b", "b": "recursive-flint"}at/mcp, no key