Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 56.2 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Ling-3.0-tiny leads on reach. 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 or small GPU that want a fast local model for tool calls and short reasoning, under MIT
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 90
Watch for
No inference provider is listed on the Hub and no inclusionAI API serves it
Best for Agents that need to read screenshots, documents and video on a local machine with 24 to 32 GB for the model, under a permissive licence
Ahead on
- Risk, 55 against 50
- Agent interface, 70 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 68 against 56
Watch for
No limitations section, safety results, agent-use 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 MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B +12
Ling-3.0-tiny 56
Model card 11, intended use, architecture, parameters and context are there, limitations, languages and a cut-off aren't. Training data 15, a data card with sources, size, cut-off and filtering. Last change 15, the newest commit is still the card change of 24 September 2026, 41 days before 4 November. Responsiveness 10, six of 16 discussions answered by an inclusionAI member, some. Version policy 5, a first release at this size. File health 0, the card's MTP recipe contradicts the files and a broken index size waits without a reply.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B 68
Model card 8, it covers intended use, architecture and parameters but not limitations, context length, languages or a knowledge cut-off. Training data 0, none described. Last change 20, a commit on 3 November 2026. Responsiveness 20, OpenBMB answered 8 of 12 discussions. Version policy 10, earlier versions keep their repositories and the changes are dated and described. File health 10, the files agree. 8 + 0 + 20 + 20 + 10 + 10 = 68.
Agent interface MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B +10
Ling-3.0-tiny 60
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 10, the format is only in the template and the card names the ling3 parser in commands without describing it, while SGLang uses another parser. Trained tool calling 20, several calls a turn and agentic results on the card. Structured output 0, not documented. Reasoning control 0, thinking turns off per request but the card doesn't say where the reasoning comes back. Context 10, 131,072 tokens native.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B 70
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 10, the card shows the tools array going in but not the call coming back, and names no parser. Trained tool calling 20, the template renders several calls in one turn. Structured output 0, not documented or claimed. Reasoning control 10, enable_thinking per request, off by default, with the trace between markers. Context 10, 262,144 tokens native.
Reach Ling-3.0-tiny +5
Ling-3.0-tiny 95
Memory earns the full 30, since inclusionAI's own Q4_K_M GGUF is 4.8 GB, about 6 GB with a fifth added. Runtimes earn the full 25, from released Transformers, vLLM, SGLang and llama.cpp, and Ollama, whose v0.40.14 (2 November 2026) pins llama.cpp b11963 with the bailingmoe3 architecture (Ollama v0.40.7 of 20 October already pinned b11738, which has it). LM Studio has nothing. Builds earn 15 for FP8, INT4 and four GGUF precisions from inclusionAI. MIT with nothing added gives terms the full 15 and the ungated repositories give download the full 10. Hosted too scores 0, because the Hub's model page lists no inference provider and no inclusionAI or Ant Group API serving it was found.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B 90
Memory 25, since OpenBMB's IQ4_XS GGUF with its vision projector is 19.6 GB and needs about 23.6 GB with the fifth added, which fits 24 GB, while its Q4_K_M GGUF, 4-bit safetensors builds and Ollama entry need 32 GB. Runtimes 25, from vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23, Transformers 5.18.0 and later, llama.cpp's own MiniCPM-V 4.7 support and OpenBMB's entry on Ollama. Builds 15, OpenBMB publishes FP8, three 4-bit safetensors builds and GGUF. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 with nothing added. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, no inference provider is mapped. 25 + 25 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 90.
Risk MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B +5
Ling-3.0-tiny 50
File safety gets 15, safetensors and GGUF only, but the card's vLLM command runs the repository's config code with --trust-remote-code. Provenance gets 15 for files in inclusionAI's own organisation with a checksum on each. Safety evaluation is 0, since SingProbe's results grade the probe, not the model. Agent guidance gets 5 for the SingProbe guardrail inclusionAI publishes for this model, with no statement of trained refusals. MIT carries no licence deductions (15). No security contact or disclosure policy was found (0).
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B 55
File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only, no Python in the main repository and no remote code needed. Provenance 15, the files come from the openbmb organisation OpenBMB's GitHub README links to, with a SHA-256 for every weight file. Safety evaluation 0 and agent guidance 0, nothing published on either, and the card has no limitations section. Licence risk 15, plain Apache 2.0. Security programme 0, no security.txt or SECURITY.md.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Ling-3.0-tiny | MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 90 | Ling-3.0-tiny +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 55 | MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 70 | MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 56 | 68 | MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B +12 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 56.2/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Ling-3.0-tiny | MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | OpenBMB |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-08-31 | 2026-11-03 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | none |
How the scores have moved
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
Ling-3.0-tiny
A small, quick hybrid reasoning model for local agent work, tool calls and coding, under MIT. It runs in about 6 GB from inclusionAI's 4-bit GGUF in released Transformers, vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp and Ollama, with no host. The risks are a card that doesn't match the files in places, a vLLM route running repository code, and no safety results.
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
A vision-language cousin for images and video that fits a 24 to 32 GB machine from OpenBMB's own GGUF, under plain Apache 2.0, with a publisher that answers. The card says little about limits, training data or how tool calls come back, so test the tool format in your runtime before relying on it.
Before you call either
Ling-3.0-tiny
- Start it with
llama-server -hf inclusionAI/Ling-3.0-tiny-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja -c 32768, which needs llama.cpp b11772 or a recent release with bailingmoe3 - With vLLM 0.32.0,
vllm serve inclusionAI/Ling-3.0-tiny --trust-remote-code --enable-prefix-caching --mamba-cache-mode align --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser ling3 --reasoning-parser ling3, which runs the repository's config code - With SGLang 0.5.22, its cookbook uses
--reasoning-parser deepseek-r1 --tool-call-parser glm45for this model, and drop the card's NEXTN flags since tiny has no MTP layer - Thinking is on by default, pass
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks - Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 20
- The template keeps earlier reasoning in the prompt, which grows long agent sessions
- Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
- For a guardrail, inclusionAI's Ling-3.0-tiny-singprobe scores intent, unsafe output and hallucination per token, but only through SGLang and vLLM integration branches
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf openbmb/MiniCPM-V-4.7-35B-A3B-gguf:Q4_K_M --jinja, orollama run openbmb/minicpm-v4.7:35b-a3b - For image input in llama.cpp add
mmproj-model-f16.gguf, or the 4x projector for more visual detail at a higher cost - The GGUF files at the repository root have thinking off. Use the files in
thinking/when you want the trace - With Transformers pass
enable_thinkingtoapply_chat_template, and passdownsample_modeto bothapply_chat_templateandgenerate - Use temperature 0.7, top_p 0.95 and top_k 100 in instruct mode, as the card recommends
- Check tool calls in your runtime first, since the card names no parser. The template uses the Qwen3.5 function-block format
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Ling-3.0-tiny or MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B?
MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 56.2 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Ling-3.0-tiny leads on reach.
Other comparisons with Ling-3.0-tiny or MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Agents-A1-4B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Arete-27B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Arete-27B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- BigBang-v1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Carbon-X vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Carbon-X vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.5-Air vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- gpt-oss-20b vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Granite 4.2 30B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Granite 4.2 3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Granite 4.2 8B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Hy3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Inkling-Small vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Inkling-Small vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Inkling vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Inkling vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Kimi K3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kimi K3 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kolibri-1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Kronos vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Kronos vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna M.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna S 2.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-1.7B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Mistral Large 4
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Mistral Large 4
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs occamy-1.0
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs SmolLM3-3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/ling-3-0-tiny-vs-minicpm-v-4-7-35b-a3b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/ling-3-0-tiny.json·/api/v1/tools/minicpm-v-4-7-35b-a3b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare ling-3-0-tiny minicpm-v-4-7-35b-a3b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "ling-3-0-tiny", "b": "minicpm-v-4-7-35b-a3b"}at/mcp, no key