Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
Nanbeige4.2-3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (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 6359 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server that want an MIT-licensed flagship for long agent runs and coding
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
574 GB in FP8 with no smaller build from inclusionAI, so no single machine under 690 GB of GPU memory runs it
Best for Local agents that need tool calling and a long context on a laptop or a small GPU
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 60
- Risk, 55 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 72 against 56
Watch for
Its own architecture: Transformers loads it only with the repository's 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.
Reach Nanbeige4.2-3B +25
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 60
Memory 0, inclusionAI's only build is the FP8 release at 573.78 GB, × 1.2 = 688.5 GB, above 256 GB, and no runtime's library has a build. Runtimes 25, Released model code in Transformers 5.22.2 (bailing_hybrid), vLLM 0.33.0 (BailingMoeV3ForCausalLM, with ling3 tool and reasoning parsers), SGLang 0.5.23 (bailing_moe_v3.py, its bailing_hybrid config and MTP module) and llama.cpp b12242 (bailingmoe3), and Ollama, credited through its pinned llama.cpp as on the Ling-3.0-tiny listing: v0.40.16 sets LLAMA_CPP_VERSION to b12177. Builds 10, the release is FP8, the one quantised precision inclusionAI publishes for it. Terms 15, MIT in the card's metadata, with no use policy or other terms added on the card or in the repository. Download 10, the Hub API's model info gives gated false on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and no terms to accept. Hosted 0, the Hub API's provider mapping is empty for this repository on 10 November 2026. 0 + 25 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 60.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 85
Memory 30, the smallest build from Nanbeige is the FP8 repository (the 8-bit GPTQ one is the same size), 5.19 GB, and 5.19 GB × 1.2 = 6.2 GB, within 16 GB. bartowski's GGUF isn't read for this line. Runtimes 15, Released SGLang 0.5.23 has the model (srt/models/nanbeige.py) with its parsers, llama.cpp b12242 has the nanbeige architecture, and vLLM 0.33.0 names NanbeigeForCausalLM in its registry, served through its Transformers backend. Builds 15, Quantised builds from Nanbeige at two precisions, FP8 and 8-bit GPTQ, each in its own repository. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata, an OSI licence, with no use policy or other terms on the card. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its FP8 and 8-bit repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 0, Hugging Face maps no inference provider to it, and no Nanbeige or BOSS Zhipin API for it was found. 30 + 15 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 85.
Agent interface Nanbeige4.2-3B +25
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 60
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (6,042 characters), which handles tools, the thinking switch and preserved reasoning. Tool-calling format 10, only the template says how tools are declared (JSON in <tools>) and how calls come back (<tool_call>name with <arg_key> and <arg_value> pairs). Trained tool calling 20, the template tells the model it may call one or more functions and loops over every entry in an assistant message's tool_calls, and the card reports gains on agentic benchmarks, AA-Briefcase and AutomationBench-AA among them. Structured output 0, the card doesn't document JSON or JSON Schema output. Reasoning control 0, the card documents turning thinking on or off per request with chat_template_kwargs enable_thinking, and names the ling3 reasoning parser, but doesn't say where the reasoning text comes back. Context 10, 262,144 tokens natively in config.json (max_position_embeddings 262144, rope_scaling null) and per SGLang's cookbook. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 60.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 85
Chat template 20, A Jinja chat template in tokenizer_config.json (7,961 characters), with enable_thinking, preserve_thinking, tools and tool_call_format switches. Tool-calling format 25, the card says passing tools switches on the tool template and recommends tool_call_format xml, with json for compatibility, and its SGLang and vLLM commands name the nanbeige tool-call parser, which released SGLang 0.5.23 has. Trained tool calling 20, the card describes fine-tuning on tool-use environments and agent scaffolds and reinforcement learning on agent tasks, and the template tells the model it may call one or more functions and renders every call in a turn. Structured output 0, Neither the card nor the files mention JSON or JSON Schema output, beyond json as a tool-call format. Reasoning control 10, the card documents enable_thinking, on by default and False per request, and preserve_thinking for earlier turns, and names the nanbeige reasoning parser, which returns the reasoning apart from the answer. Context 10, 262,144 tokens, which the card says the model supports and config.json gives as max_position_embeddings. 20 + 25 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 85.
Documentation and upkeep Nanbeige4.2-3B +16
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 56
Model card 11, Intended use (complex reasoning, multi-step tasks and agentic workflows), architecture, parameters (560B total, 25B active) and context (1M claimed) are on the card. Training data 15, the training-content summary the card links names the source categories (Common Crawl and other public datasets, commercially licensed data, the Ant Spider crawler, synthetic data), the size band (over 10 trillion text tokens), data collected up to about July 2026 and the filtering, without listing datasets with sizes. Last change 20, the newest commit, on 4 November 2026, edited the card, six days before this check, and the files went up on 27 October. Responsiveness 0, Neither of the 2 discussions that aren't pull requests (both opened on 27 October 2026) has a reply from an inclusionAI member. Version policy 5, the update went into a repository of its own and Ling-3.1-flash and Ling 3.0 stay in theirs. File health 5, the card states a 1M-token context while config.json gives 262,144 with no rope scaling, and its serve commands name the earlier repository as the model path. 11 + 15 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 56.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 72
Model card 17, Intended use, limitations, the architecture, the parameters (3B outside the embeddings), the context and the languages (in the metadata) are on the card. Training data 5, A general description of how the fine-tuning and reinforcement learning data was built and filtered, with no sources, sizes or cut-off. Last change 15, the last commit, on 11 September 2026, updated modeling_nanbeige.py, 60 days before this check and within 90. Responsiveness 20, Of the 34 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (21 July to 10 September 2026), 20 have a reply from a Nanbeige member, which is most. Version policy 5, Nanbeige's earlier models (Nanbeige4-3B, 4.1-3B) stay in their own repositories, as the Base, FP8, 8-bit and DSpark builds of this one do. File health 10, Config, tokenizer config, template and card agree on the architecture and the 262,144 tokens. 17 + 5 + 15 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 72.
Risk Nanbeige4.2-3B +10
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 45
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25), less 10 because the card's documented vLLM command passes --trust-remote-code, which runs the repository's configuration_bailing_moe_v3.py, since vLLM 0.33.0 registers no bailing_hybrid config of its own. Provenance 15, files in the inclusionAI organisation that inclusion-ai.org links to, per the Ling-3.0-tiny listing (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results for the model on its card or in the training-content summary. Agent guidance 0, the card has nothing on prompt injection, refusals or safeguards, and inclusionAI publishes no guardrail probe for this model as it did for Ling 3.0. Licence risk 15, MIT with no use policy, no field-of-use limits, no threshold and no clause letting inclusionAI change or revoke it. Security programme 0, www.inclusion-ai.org answers 404 for security.txt on 10 November 2026, and the Ling-3.0-tiny listing found no SECURITY.md or disclosure policy in the inclusionAI .github repository. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 45.
Nanbeige4.2-3B 55
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, the files sit in the Nanbeige organisation (Nanbeige LLM Lab), which the lab's arXiv report for this model links, so the publisher's own account, although the Hub hasn't verified it (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 5, General cautions: the limitations section says outputs may be inaccurate, biased or harmful. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, no threshold and no clause letting the licensor change or revoke it. Security programme 5, BOSS Zhipin runs a security response centre for reporting flaws in its products, as read for the Nanbeige4.3-33B listing (5), though nothing links it to the model. 15 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 15 + 5 = 55.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Nanbeige4.2-3B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 85 | Nanbeige4.2-3B +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 45 | 55 | Nanbeige4.2-3B +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 85 | Nanbeige4.2-3B +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 56 | 72 | Nanbeige4.2-3B +16 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 54.8/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Nanbeige4.2-3B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 (Hub metadata only; the repository has no LICENSE file) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-11-04 | 2026-09-11 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
Verdicts
Ling-3.1-flash-1019
inclusionAI's newest flagship, a 560B hybrid mixture of experts under plain MIT that vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp run in released versions. It ships only as 574 GB of FP8, so it needs a multi-GPU server. The card overstates the context, documents little about tool calls, and has no safety results.
Nanbeige4.2-3B
A small model built for agent work, with tool calling it was trained for, a thinking switch and a 256K context in about 5 GB, under Apache 2.0, from a lab that answers most questions. Its architecture is its own, so check your runtime: SGLang and llama.cpp have it, Transformers needs the repository's code, and Nanbeige ships no GGUF.
Before you call either
Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Serve it with SGLang 0.5.23 or later on 8 H200 or 4 GB300 GPUs, per the card, and use this repository's name as the model path, not the earlier one the card's command shows
- With vLLM pass
--trust-remote-code,--tool-call-parser ling3and--reasoning-parser ling3 - Set
chat_template_kwargsenable_thinkingfalse for direct answers. Reasoning comes back inreasoning_contentper SGLang's cookbook - Plan on 262,144 tokens of context. The 1M figure needs the YaRN override in SGLang's cookbook
- Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 20, per the card
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Serve it with SGLang 0.5.23 or later and pass
--tool-call-parser nanbeige --reasoning-parser nanbeige - Pass
toolsin the request. The card recommendstool_call_format="xml" - Set
preserve_thinkingtrue for multi-turn tool use and coding, false for plain chat - Use temperature 1.0 for agent and tool work and 0.6 for reasoning and chat, per the card
- For llama.cpp use b12242 or later. The GGUF files on the Hub are bartowski's, not Nanbeige's
- If you load it with Transformers, read modeling_nanbeige.py first: trust_remote_code runs it
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Ling-3.1-flash-1019 or Nanbeige4.2-3B?
Nanbeige4.2-3B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with Ling-3.1-flash-1019 or Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Agents-A1-4B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Arete-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Arete-27B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- BigBang-v1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Carbon-X vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Carbon-X vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Cola2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Cola2 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Devstral Small 2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Devstral Small 2 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-20b vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy3 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Inkling-Small vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling-Small vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Inkling vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kimi K3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kolibri-1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Kronos vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kronos vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna M.1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LBS-27B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-1.7B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs LongCat-2.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Mistral Large 4
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs North Mini Code 1.0
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs ZAYA1-8B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Mistral Large 4 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs North Mini Code 1.0
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs occamy-1.0
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Step 3.7 Flash
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs ZAYA1-8B
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019-vs-nanbeige-4-2-3b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/ling-3-1-flash-1019.json·/api/v1/tools/nanbeige-4-2-3b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare ling-3-1-flash-1019 nanbeige-4-2-3b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "ling-3-1-flash-1019", "b": "nanbeige-4-2-3b"}at/mcp, no key