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

Nanbeige4.2-3B vs occamy-1.0

Nanbeige4.2-3B and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 leads on reach. 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

Nanbeige4.2-3B C

Best for Local agents that need tool calling and a long context on a laptop or a small GPU

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 85 against 70

Watch for

Its own architecture: Transformers loads it only with the repository's code

occamy-1.0 C

Best for Agents that want an Apache 2.0 mixture-of-experts model tuned for long tool-using tasks on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac.

Ahead on

  • Reach, 90 against 85

Watch for

No safety results, prompt-injection 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.

Agent interface Nanbeige4.2-3B +15

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.

occamy-1.0 70

Chat template 20, the base's Jinja template in the repository. Tool-calling format 10 of 25, the card names the parser but the format lives only in the template. Trained tool calling 20, trained on tool use with several calls a turn. Structured output 0, not documented. Reasoning control 10, enable_thinking per request and the card says to keep the returned reasoning content. Context 10, 262,144 tokens.

Reach occamy-1.0 +5

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.

occamy-1.0 90

Memory 25 of 30, Accio's MLX mxfp4 build is 18.4 GB, 22.1 GB with a fifth added, and its IQ4_XS GGUF needs 22.5 GB, both within 24 GB. Runtimes 25, the most the line gives, it keeps the base's qwen3_5_moe architecture, which llama.cpp, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers run in released versions, and Ollama v0.40.14 builds a llama.cpp (b11963) that has it. Builds 15, FP8, NVFP4, GGUF and MLX from Accio. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 like its base. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, no API or inference provider serves it. 25 + 25 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 90.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runNanbeige4.2-3Boccamy-1.0Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258590occamy-1.0 +5
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%108570Nanbeige4.2-3B +15
Documentation and upkeep10%107274occamy-1.0 +2
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactNanbeige4.2-3Boccamy-1.0
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorNanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin)Accio (Accio-Lab)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0 (Hub metadata only; the repository has no LICENSE file)Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-09-112026-10-02
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone3/5 (4)

How the scores have moved

Verdicts

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.

occamy-1.0

A Qwen3.6-35B-A3B fine-tuned for long agent work with tools, files and code, under plain Apache 2.0, and Accio's 4-bit builds run in about 23 GB. The main gaps are no safety results, agent guidance or security contact, and every benchmark figure is Accio's own.

Before you call either

Nanbeige4.2-3B

  1. Serve it with SGLang 0.5.23 or later and pass --tool-call-parser nanbeige --reasoning-parser nanbeige
  2. Pass tools in the request. The card recommends tool_call_format="xml"
  3. Set preserve_thinking true for multi-turn tool use and coding, false for plain chat
  4. Use temperature 1.0 for agent and tool work and 0.6 for reasoning and chat, per the card
  5. For llama.cpp use b12242 or later. The GGUF files on the Hub are bartowski's, not Nanbeige's
  6. If you load it with Transformers, read modeling_nanbeige.py first: trust_remote_code runs it

occamy-1.0

  1. Serve with --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder on vLLM 0.19.0 or SGLang 0.5.10 and later
  2. BF16 is 70.2 GB, so on a 128 GB machine run it without the card's 8-way tensor parallelism
  3. Keep the whole assistant message, reasoning and tool calls included, in later turns, as the card says
  4. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 and presence_penalty 1.5
  5. With the GGUFs, NFC-normalise input text and read TOKENIZER.md, since the files store qwen2 pre-tokenizer metadata
  6. The base's MTP layer isn't in this checkpoint, Accio-Lab/occamy-1.0-MTP is an experimental separate head
  7. Ollama has no Occamy library entry, so load Accio's GGUF in Ollama 0.40.14 or later, which builds a llama.cpp with the qwen35moe architecture

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Nanbeige4.2-3B or occamy-1.0?

Nanbeige4.2-3B and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 leads on reach.

Other comparisons with Nanbeige4.2-3B or occamy-1.0

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.