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

MiniCPM5-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B

Nanbeige4.3-33B and MiniCPM5-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.2 (C). MiniCPM5-2B 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 3341 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

MiniCPM5-2B C

Best for On-device and laptop agents that want a 2 GB tool-calling helper with long context and open training data

Ahead on

  • Reach, 90 against 55
  • Documentation and upkeep, 97 against 56

Watch for

OpenBMB documents only a Think mode for the 2B, so every answer starts with reasoning

Nanbeige4.3-33B C

Best for Agents with about 96 GB of GPU memory, or the 128 GB reference machine, that want an Apache-tagged 33B model for long coding and tool loops and can wait for independent results.

Ahead on

  • Risk, 60 against 55
  • Agent interface, 85 against 75

Watch for

No independent benchmark result yet; every agentic number on the card is Nanbeige's own run

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runMiniCPM5-2BNanbeige4.3-33BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259055MiniCPM5-2B +35
Risk20%205560Nanbeige4.3-33B +5
Agent interface10%107585Nanbeige4.3-33B +10
Documentation and upkeep10%109756MiniCPM5-2B +41
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 60.2/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactMiniCPM5-2BNanbeige4.3-33B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorOpenBMBNanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0 (Hub metadata only; the repository has no LICENSE file)
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-09-292026-10-24
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 reviews3/5 (4)none

Verdicts

MiniCPM5-2B

A tiny dense cousin for local tool calling and long context, with published training data and an active publisher. OpenBMB's own 4-bit builds need about 2 GB, so it runs on a laptop or phone in vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp, Ollama or Transformers. The main risks are always-on thinking, no safety results and use conditions beyond Apache 2.0.

Nanbeige4.3-33B

A dense 33B Llama-architecture cousin for long agentic coding and office tasks, with per-request thinking, XML tool calls that stock vLLM and SGLang parse, and 512K of context. It needs about 96 GB at BF16, as Nanbeige ships no quantised build. Its agentic results so far are Nanbeige's own, with no safety results, training data notes or licence file.

Before you call either

MiniCPM5-2B

  1. Smallest start is ollama run openbmb/minicpm5-2b (1.6 GB, q4_k_m)
  2. On vLLM 0.29.0 or later run vllm serve openbmb/MiniCPM5-2B --max-model-len 131072 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser minicpm5, or tool calls come back as XML text
  3. On SGLang 0.5.16 or later add --tool-call-parser minicpm5 --reasoning-parser qwen3; SGLang is OpenBMB's recommended backend for tool calls
  4. Tool calls are XML, <function name=...><param name=...>, not Hermes JSON
  5. Sample with temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and min_p 0.0; llama.cpp's default min_p 0.05 can loop, and repetition_penalty 1.05 helps if it does
  6. Expect a <think> block before every answer and leave room in max_tokens; enable_thinking false is accepted by the template but OpenBMB doesn't support it for the 2B
  7. Validate JSON yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding, since structured output isn't documented
  8. Use the main repository's template; the GGUF, MLX and GPTQ copies predate the 29 September fix

Nanbeige4.3-33B

  1. Serve with vllm serve Nanbeige/Nanbeige4.3-33B --enable-auto-tool-choice --reasoning-parser qwen3 --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, as the card says, or SGLang with the same two parsers
  2. Keep tool_call_format at its default xml, since qwen3_coder parses that format; the json option writes Hermes-style JSON calls, which need a different parser such as vLLM's hermes
  3. Pass chat_template_kwargs {"preserve_thinking": true} for multi-turn tool use and coding, and {"enable_thinking": false} to skip reasoning, as the card recommends
  4. Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and up to 65,536 new tokens for agent work, and temperature 0.6 for reasoning and chat, per the card
  5. Send your own system prompt, since without one the template injects a Chinese identity line, or a Chinese tool-expert prompt when tools are passed
  6. Send one system message at the start only, as the template raises an error for a later one
  7. In plain Transformers pass use_cache=True to generate, since config.json and generation_config.json set it false; trust_remote_code isn't needed

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, MiniCPM5-2B or Nanbeige4.3-33B?

Nanbeige4.3-33B and MiniCPM5-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.2 (C). MiniCPM5-2B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with MiniCPM5-2B or Nanbeige4.3-33B

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.