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

occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-9B

occamy-1.0 and Qwen3.5-9B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.5 (C). 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

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

  • Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 34

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.0 against 2.5 out of 5

Watch for

No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact

Qwen3.5-9B C

Best for Agents that want a small multimodal tool-calling cousin on a laptop or a 16 GB GPU, under a plain licence

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

No quantised build from Qwen itself

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runoccamy-1.0Qwen3.5-9BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258585even
Risk20%205555even
Agent interface10%107070even
Documentation and upkeep10%107434occamy-1.0 +40
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 60.5/100

Facts side by side

Factoccamy-1.0Qwen3.5-9B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorAccio (Accio-Lab)Alibaba (Qwen team)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-10-022026-03-02
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)2.5/5 (4)

Verdicts

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.

Qwen3.5-9B

A small dense vision-language cousin with trained tool calling, switchable thinking and a 262,144-token context, for local agent subtasks. Ollama's 4-bit build needs about 8 GB and the BF16 files about 24 GB, in every major runtime. The main risk is neglect, with no file changes since March, no replies from Qwen to reports and no safety results.

Before you call either

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

Qwen3.5-9B

  1. Smallest start is ollama run qwen3.5:9b (6.6 GB, q4_k_m)
  2. On vLLM run vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3.5-9B --port 8000 --max-model-len 262144 --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, or tool calls come back as text
  3. Tool calls use the XML style <tool_call><function=name><parameter=x>, not Hermes JSON, so use the qwen3_coder parser and not hermes
  4. Thinking is on by default; pass chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks, since /nothink isn't supported
  5. There's no generation_config.json, so pass sampling yourself, temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20, presence_penalty 1.5 when thinking, or 0.7, 0.8, 20, 1.5 without
  6. Keep at least 128K of context when thinking, and turn on YaRN only beyond 262,144 tokens
  7. Validate JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, occamy-1.0 or Qwen3.5-9B?

occamy-1.0 and Qwen3.5-9B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 60.5 (C).

Other comparisons with occamy-1.0 or Qwen3.5-9B

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.