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

Ling-3.0-tiny vs Spark-X2.6-4B

Spark-X2.6-4B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 55 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Ling-3.0-tiny leads on reach and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Ling-3.0-tiny C

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, 90 against 85
  • Documentation and upkeep, 56 against 41

Watch for

No hosted provider today, and Ollama support is only an unmerged pull request

Spark-X2.6-4B C

Best for Agents that want a tiny local model for tool loops and long documents on a laptop, CPU or small GPU.

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 70 against 60

Watch for

No safety results and no agent or prompt-injection guidance

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runLing-3.0-tinySpark-X2.6-4BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259085Ling-3.0-tiny +5
Risk20%205050even
Agent interface10%106070Spark-X2.6-4B +10
Documentation and upkeep10%105641Ling-3.0-tiny +15
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 55/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactLing-3.0-tinySpark-X2.6-4B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorinclusionAI (Ant Group)SparkLLM (XHToken)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceMITApache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-08-312026-10-20
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews2.8/5 (4)3/5 (4)

Verdicts

Ling-3.0-tiny

A small, quick hybrid reasoning cousin 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 and llama.cpp, with no host. The main risks are a card that doesn't match the files in places, the vLLM route running repository code, and no model safety results.

Spark-X2.6-4B

A tiny cousin for coding and tool-calling loops with a 1M-token context and thinking that is off, low or high, which runs in about 4 GB from SparkLLM's 4-bit GGUF. Use llama.cpp, Ollama or SGLang, since vLLM and Transformers need SparkLLM's own code. The risks are no safety work or agent guidance and a thin, two-day-old card.

Before you call either

Ling-3.0-tiny

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. With SGLang 0.5.22, its cookbook uses --reasoning-parser deepseek-r1 --tool-call-parser glm45 for this model, and drop the card's NEXTN flags since tiny has no MTP layer
  4. Thinking is on by default, pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks
  5. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 20
  6. The template keeps earlier reasoning in the prompt, which grows long agent sessions
  7. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
  8. 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

Spark-X2.6-4B

  1. Quickest start is llama-server -hf XHToken/Spark-X2.6-4B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, which needs llama.cpp b10828 or later, or ollama run SparkLLM/Spark-X2.6-4B (8.2 GB, Ollama 0.34.1 or later)
  2. For parsed tool calls serve it with SGLang 0.5.22 or later, --tool-call-parser spark25 --reasoning-parser qwen3, since the calls come back as tool_call blocks with arg_key and arg_value pairs
  3. Thinking is on by default. Pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false to turn it off, or reasoning_effort low for short thinking; the template raises an error on any effort other than high or low
  4. SparkLLM's recommended sampling is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k -1
  5. The template always opens with its own default system line, with the effort instruction, and puts your system message after the tool list
  6. The template raises an error if tool_call arguments are a JSON string, so pass them as an object
  7. Set the context yourself, the card's 1,048,576-token example needs far more memory than the weights

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Ling-3.0-tiny or Spark-X2.6-4B?

Spark-X2.6-4B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.0-tiny's 55 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Ling-3.0-tiny leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Ling-3.0-tiny or Spark-X2.6-4B

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.