Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LongCat-2.5 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT scores 56.8 (C) on agent readiness against LongCat-2.5's 50.5 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LongCat-2.5 leads on risk and agent interface. 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 Operators with NPU clusters, and anyone tracking what the open flagships can do
Ahead on
- Risk, 60 against 55
- Agent interface, 75 against 60
Watch for
3,562 GB in BF16 and 1,336 GB at 4 bits
Best for Telecoms teams that want an open model for standards questions and RAG on their own hardware
Ahead on
- Reach, 50 against 35
- Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 46
Watch for
BF16 only at 62.6 GB, with no GGUF or other quantised build from anyone we checked
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 OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT +28
LongCat-2.5 46
Model card 11, Intended use, limitations (the usage considerations), the architecture and the parameter counts are on the card. Training data 5, A general description of the training stages and where the reinforcement learning tasks came from, with no sources, sizes or cut-off. Last change 20, the last commit, on 10 November 2026, updated the card, on the day of this check. Responsiveness 0, Neither of the 2 discussions that aren't pull requests (9 and 10 November 2026) has a reply from a meituan-longcat member, counted on 10 November by author flags and dates with a script, text not read. Version policy 5, LongCat-2.0 stays in its own repositories and 2.5 came out in new ones, with no dated note on the older ones that we read. File health 5, the template is in both places and agrees, but config.json's auto_map names configuration_longcat_oe and modeling_longcat_oe, which aren't in the repository, and the tokenizer config's 131,072-token length is a quarter of the config's 524,288 positions. 11 + 5 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 46.
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT 74
Model card 14, Intended use, a long limitations section, the architecture and training method, the parameters (31B) and the language (English) are on the card. Training data 15, the card names the sources (3GPP, ETSI, ITU, GSMA, CAMARA, O-RAN and TM Forum material provided by GSMA), the overall sizes (15 billion raw tokens, over 1 trillion processed, about 440 billion used), the mix of example types and the processing tool, and lists what was left out. Last change 20, the last commit, on 1 November 2026, updated the card's links, resources, citation and contacts, nine days before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 3 discussions that aren't pull requests (7 August to 28 October 2026), 2 have a reply from the repository's owner, which is most. Version policy 0, the weights were replaced in place: uploads on 27 July, 3 August and 1 September 2026 under one name, with a standing notice on the card that they may change and that users should pin a revision, and no dated note of what changed. File health 5, the card describes 15 shards of about 62.6 GB while the repository still holds an earlier 14-shard set beside them, 126.8 GB in all. 14 + 15 + 20 + 20 + 0 + 5 = 74.
Reach OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT +15
LongCat-2.5 35
Memory 0, the smallest build is Meituan's W4A4 repository, 1,336 GB, and 1,336 GB × 1.2 = 1,603 GB, far above 256 GB. The BF16 files are 3,562 GB. Runtimes 0, none of the six runs it in a released version: vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23, Transformers 5.22.2 and llama.cpp b12242 have no LongcatCausalLM or pro_v code, and the model code config.json names isn't in the repository. Builds 10, one quantised build from Meituan, the W4A4 repository (4-bit experts, 1,336 GB). Terms 15, MIT in the metadata, the LICENSE file and the card, with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for both 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. 0 + 0 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 35.
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT 50
Memory 10, the publisher's only build is the BF16 safetensors, 62.55 GB for the 15 shards the index names, and 62.55 GB × 1.2 = 75.1 GB, above 64 GB and inside the reference machine's GPU share. Runtimes 15, the architecture is Gemma4ForConditionalGeneration, which vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 run from the safetensors files, three at 5 each. Builds 0, the publisher ships the BF16 weights only. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata, an OSI licence, with nothing added on the card. Download 10, gated is false on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account or terms. Hosted 0, Hugging Face maps one inference provider, Featherless AI (live), short of the two the line needs. 10 + 15 + 0 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 50.
Agent interface LongCat-2.5 +15
LongCat-2.5 75
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (11,823 characters), with a copy in tokenizer_config.json. Tool-calling format 25, the card documents how tools are declared (the OpenAI function format) and how calls come back (tool_calls with an id, a name and JSON arguments, answered by a tool message), in a worked example against an OpenAI-compatible server. Trained tool calling 10, the card describes reinforcement learning on long agentic tasks and shows one tool call in a turn. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained output. Reasoning control 10, enable_thinking on or off per request through chat_template_kwargs, with the reasoning returned as reasoning_content, both shown on the card. Context 10, the card states no context length, but config.json gives 524,288 positions and the card's own evaluations ran at 512K and 1M sequence lengths after what it calls long-context training, so 128K or more is taken as trained. 20 + 25 + 10 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 75.
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT 60
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository, 19,300 characters, the publisher's own. Tool-calling format 10, only the template says how tools are declared and how calls come back. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over tool_calls, so it renders several calls in one turn, and the card says the training mix included general-purpose agentic tool-calling examples, while none were specific to telecoms. Structured output 0, the card doesn't document JSON or JSON Schema output. Reasoning control 0, the card says the model wasn't trained to produce or consume Gemma's thought channel and answers directly, so there is no thinking to switch or budget. Context 10, 262,144 positions in the text config, the base's native context. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 60.
Risk LongCat-2.5 +5
LongCat-2.5 60
File safety 25, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository. Provenance 15, the files sit in the meituan-longcat organisation, the name of Meituan's GitHub organisation that the card links for deployment, and the card's licence names Meituan (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 5, General cautions under Usage Considerations: not evaluated for every use, assess accuracy, safety and fairness before sensitive use, and follow the law. Licence risk 15, MIT with no use policy, no threshold and no right to change the terms. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card beyond a general contact, and Meituan's own security pages weren't looked up, so this scores as absent and is an open question. 25 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 15 + 0 = 60.
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT 55
File safety 25, safetensors only, with no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python files. Provenance 5, the files sit in a personal account, farbodtavakkoli, not in an organisation AT&T's or GSMA's site links to: GSMA's article names AT&T as the releaser without linking the repository, and the GitHub repository that links it is the same person's (0). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 10, the card says what the trained abstention covers (declining when context is missing, irrelevant or insufficient) and what to add around the model for agent use: an external tool runtime, validated tool schemas, permission controls, audit logging, safeguards and human review. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, field-of-use limit, threshold or change clause, nothing is added on the card, and the licence link resolves (200 on 10 November 2026). Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 25 + 5 + 0 + 10 + 15 + 0 = 55.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LongCat-2.5 | OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 35 | 50 | OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT +15 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 60 | 55 | LongCat-2.5 +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 60 | LongCat-2.5 +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 46 | 74 | OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT +28 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 50.5/100 | C 56.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LongCat-2.5 | OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Meituan (LongCat) | AT&T (Open Telco AI) |
| 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 | 2026-11-10 | 2026-11-01 |
| Terms last updated | not read yet | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
Verdicts
LongCat-2.5
Meituan's flagship is MIT-licensed and documented for tool calling and switchable reasoning, with strong numbers of its own on agentic coding. Almost nobody can run it: 3,562 GB of weights, a 1,336 GB 4-bit build for NPU accelerators, and no released runtime with its architecture. A model to watch until a runtime or a provider picks it up.
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
A real telecoms post-training of Gemma 4 31B IT with an unusually candid card on what was and wasn't trained. It fits a 128 GB machine in BF16 only, with no quantised build, sits in a personal account, and its weights have been replaced in place. Tool-call format, structured output and safety results aren't documented.
Before you call either
LongCat-2.5
- You can't run this on a workstation or a single GPU server. Plan for a provider, and none serves it yet
- If an operator serves it, call it as an OpenAI-compatible chat API with tools in the function format
- Pass
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingtrue or false - With thinking on, keep earlier reasoning in the history (
save_history_reasoning_contenttrue), as the card recommends - The card's results use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95
- Its benchmark table is Meituan's own. The unmarked scores are in-house
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Download the 15 shards the index names, not the whole repository, which is twice the size
- Pin a revision. The card says the weights may change under the same name
- Serve it with vLLM 0.19.0 or later and the repository's own chat template, not Gemma 4's
- Send no thinking flags. It answers directly and wasn't trained on Gemma's thought channel
- Use it as the generation stage of a RAG pipeline over telecom standards, with source attribution and human review
- Don't use it to run network tools unattended. The card says that hasn't been evaluated
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, LongCat-2.5 or OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT?
OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT scores 56.8 (C) on agent readiness against LongCat-2.5's 50.5 (D), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. LongCat-2.5 leads on risk and agent interface.
Other comparisons with LongCat-2.5 or OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs LongCat-2.5
- Agents-A1-4B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LongCat-2.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LongCat-2.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Arete-27B vs LongCat-2.5
- Arete-27B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- BigBang-v1 vs LongCat-2.5
- BigBang-v1 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Carbon-X vs LongCat-2.5
- Carbon-X vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Cola2 vs LongCat-2.5
- Cola2 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LongCat-2.5
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LongCat-2.5
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LongCat-2.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LongCat-2.5
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Devstral Small 2 vs LongCat-2.5
- Devstral Small 2 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs LongCat-2.5
- EXAONE 4.5 33B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LongCat-2.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-4.5-Air vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- GLM-5.3 vs LongCat-2.5
- GLM-5.3 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- gpt-oss-120b vs LongCat-2.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- gpt-oss-20b vs LongCat-2.5
- gpt-oss-20b vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LongCat-2.5
- Granite 4.2 30B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LongCat-2.5
- Granite 4.2 3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LongCat-2.5
- Granite 4.2 8B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LongCat-2.5
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Hy3 vs LongCat-2.5
- Hy3 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Inkling-Small vs LongCat-2.5
- Inkling-Small vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Inkling vs LongCat-2.5
- Inkling vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LongCat-2.5
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LongCat-2.5
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Kimi K3 vs LongCat-2.5
- Kimi K3 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Kolibri-1 vs LongCat-2.5
- Kolibri-1 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Kronos vs LongCat-2.5
- Kronos vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Laguna M.1 vs LongCat-2.5
- Laguna M.1 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LongCat-2.5
- Laguna S 2.1 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LongCat-2.5
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LBS-27B vs LongCat-2.5
- LBS-27B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LFM3-1.7B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-1.7B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LFM3-VL-2B vs LongCat-2.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs LongCat-2.5
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs LongCat-2.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LongCat-2.5 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LongCat-2.5 vs Mistral Large 4
- LongCat-2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nanbeige4.2-3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LongCat-2.5 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LongCat-2.5 vs North Mini Code 1.0
- LongCat-2.5 vs occamy-1.0
- LongCat-2.5 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LongCat-2.5 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LongCat-2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- LongCat-2.5 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LongCat-2.5 vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- LongCat-2.5 vs SmolLM3-3B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- LongCat-2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LongCat-2.5 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LongCat-2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LongCat-2.5 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- LongCat-2.5 vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- LongCat-2.5 vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- LongCat-2.5 vs ZAYA1-8B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash-RL vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiniCPM5-2B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Mistral Large 4 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nanbeige4.2-3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- North Mini Code 1.0 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- occamy-1.0 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Ornith-1.5-122B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.5-4B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.8-27B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Recursive Flint
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Ripple-65B Preview
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs SenseNova-Loop-9B-Preview
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs SmolLM3-3B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Step 3.7 Flash
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs WeVisOne-VL-2B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs WeVisOne-VL-4B
- OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT vs ZAYA1-8B
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/longcat-2-5-vs-otel-2-0-llm-31b-it.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/longcat-2-5.json·/api/v1/tools/otel-2-0-llm-31b-it.json - From a terminal
anchor compare longcat-2-5 otel-2-0-llm-31b-it(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "longcat-2-5", "b": "otel-2-0-llm-31b-it"}at/mcp, no key