Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LFM3-VL-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Step 3.7 Flash's 59.8 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Step 3.7 Flash leads on risk. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 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 70
- Agent interface, 90 against 85
- Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 39
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself
Best for Teams with a GPU server or a provider account that want an open, long-context agent model with vision
Ahead on
- Risk, 45 against 40
Watch for
About 131 GB to run at 4 bits with images, over a 128 GB machine's share
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 +38
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.
Step 3.7 Flash 39
Model card 14, Intended use, the architecture, the parameters, the context and the language (in the metadata) are on the card. Training data 0, Nothing on the card about the training data. Last change 10, the last commit, on 3 June 2026, fixed the modelling code, 160 days before this check and within 180. Responsiveness 0, none of the 11 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (29 May to 24 June 2026) has a reply from a stepfun-ai member, counted on 10 November by author flags and dates with a script, text not read. Version policy 5, Step-3.5-Flash stays in its own repositories and 3.7 came out in new ones, with no dated note on the older cards that we read. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the context, and June commits fixed the modelling code. 14 + 0 + 10 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 39.
Reach LFM3-VL-2B +15
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.
Step 3.7 Flash 70
Memory 5, the smallest build at 4 bits is StepFun's IQ4_XS GGUF, 104.99 GB with the 3.97 GB projector, and 108.96 GB × 1.2 = 130.8 GB, over what the reference machine can give a model and within 256 GB. The IQ3 and Q3 builds are below 4 bits and aren't read. Runtimes 20, Released vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 have the step3p7 model, and llama.cpp b12242 has the architecture, with StepFun's own GGUF. Four at 5 each, and the card documents all four. Builds 15, StepFun publishes GGUF at five quantised precisions, an FP8 build and an NVFP4 build. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata and its licence section, an OSI licence with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for all four repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, StepFun's own API serves it, per the card and our StepFun API listing, and Featherless and DeepInfra are live for it on Hugging Face. 5 + 20 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 5 = 70.
Risk Step 3.7 Flash +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.
Step 3.7 Flash 45
File safety 15, safetensors and GGUF only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, the files sit in the stepfun-ai organisation, which the card's StepFun platform and model page belong to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations section and gives no guidance on prompt injection, instruction priority, refusals or safeguards. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, threshold or change clause. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card, and our StepFun API listing found no security.txt, bug bounty or disclosure policy. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 45.
Agent interface LFM3-VL-2B +5
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.
Step 3.7 Flash 85
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (5,723 characters). Tool-calling format 25, the card names the parser to use in two runtimes, step3p5 in vLLM (with auto tool choice) and in SGLang, and both ship Step parsers in a release. Trained tool calling 20, the card presents tool orchestration as a main use, with multi-turn results, and the template renders every call in a turn. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained output for the weights. Reasoning control 10, the template has a reasoning_effort setting and keeps reasoning_content, and the card names the step3p5 reasoning parser for vLLM and SGLang, which returns the reasoning apart from the answer. Context 10, 256K tokens per the card, and 262,144 positions in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 85.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LFM3-VL-2B | Step 3.7 Flash | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 85 | 70 | LFM3-VL-2B +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 40 | 45 | Step 3.7 Flash +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 85 | LFM3-VL-2B +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 77 | 39 | LFM3-VL-2B +38 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 59.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LFM3-VL-2B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Liquid AI | StepFun |
| 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 (metadata and card; no LICENSE file) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-11-09 | 2026-06-03 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
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.
Step 3.7 Flash
A capable open agent model with a clean licence, every kind of build and four released runtimes. Two things hold it back: it's a little too big for a 128 GB machine at 4 bits, whatever the card says, and StepFun has gone quiet on the repository since June. No safety results, limitations or data description.
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
Step 3.7 Flash
- On a 128 GB machine the 4-bit GGUF won't fit with a working context. Use StepFun's API or a provider, or a server
- On vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser step3p5 --reasoning-parser step3p5 - The card's commands pass trust-remote-code. Released Transformers 5.22.2 has the model built in if you'd rather not run the repository's code
- For llama.cpp load the mmproj file from StepFun's GGUF repository for image input
- StepFun's API has two hosts. Use the one where your key was issued,
api.stepfun.aiorapi.stepfun.com - The same model is on our StepFun API listing, with prices and terms
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LFM3-VL-2B or Step 3.7 Flash?
LFM3-VL-2B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Step 3.7 Flash's 59.8 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Step 3.7 Flash leads on risk.
Other comparisons with LFM3-VL-2B or Step 3.7 Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Arete-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Carbon-X vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Cola2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cola2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Devstral Small 2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Devstral Small 2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Step 3.7 Flash
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling-Small vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Inkling vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling vs Step 3.7 Flash
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-VL-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Kronos vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kronos vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- 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 Nanbeige4.2-3B
- 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 North Mini Code 1.0
- 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 OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- 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 SenseNova-Loop-9B-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
- LFM3-VL-2B vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs ZAYA1-8B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LongCat-2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Mistral Large 4 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- North Mini Code 1.0 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- occamy-1.0 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-122B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Recursive Flint vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ripple-65B Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
- SmolLM3-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Step 3.7 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Step 3.7 Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs ZAYA1-8B
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lfm3-vl-2b-vs-step-3-7-flash.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lfm3-vl-2b.json·/api/v1/tools/step-3-7-flash.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lfm3-vl-2b step-3-7-flash(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lfm3-vl-2b", "b": "step-3-7-flash"}at/mcp, no key