Pick Hunyuan Hy3 for frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost or runs a 295b model at the cost of a 21b — only 21b parameters active per token. Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. On a tight budget at scale, Hunyuan Hy3 is the value pick.
Hunyuan Hy3 (Tencent, China) and Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Hunyuan Hy3 is a 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
Hunyuan Hy3
Laguna XS 2.1
Provider
Tencent (China)
Poolside (US)
Released
July 6, 2026
July 2, 2026
Context window
256K (~384 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
70.9%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Frontier-level reported reasoning and science (GPQA Diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost: Hunyuan Hy3 — A 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost — and it is the newer of the two.
Runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token: Hunyuan Hy3 — Hunyuan Hy3 lists runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out: Hunyuan Hy3 — Hunyuan Hy3 lists clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — Hunyuan Hy3 is comparatively weak here — benchmarks are largely self-reported, and the ultra-low hosted pricing is a limited promotion
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime: Laguna XS 2.1 — Laguna XS 2.1 lists open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime among its strengths; Hunyuan Hy3 does not.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price: Laguna XS 2.1 — Laguna XS 2.1 lists cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price among its strengths; Hunyuan Hy3 does not.
Lowest cost at scale: Hunyuan Hy3 — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Laguna XS 2.1's $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Hunyuan Hy3 — At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Laguna XS 2.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Laguna XS 2.1 — Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost: Hunyuan Hy3 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters: Laguna XS 2.1 — That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: Laguna XS 2.1 or Hunyuan Hy3 — Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
Hunyuan Hy3: where it fits
A 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost. Released July 6, 2026 by Tencent, it is built for frontier-level reported reasoning and science (GPQA Diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost, runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token, clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out, and broad day-one ecosystem support plus an FP8 checkpoint.
Its trade-offs are real: benchmarks are largely self-reported, and the ultra-low hosted pricing is a limited promotion, and the hosted API is China-jurisdiction, and self-hosting a 295B MoE still needs serious hardware. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Hunyuan Hy3 (China) and Laguna XS 2.1 (US) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Hunyuan Hy3 is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Frequently asked questions
Is Hunyuan Hy3 or Laguna XS 2.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Hunyuan Hy3, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Hunyuan Hy3 leans toward frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost while Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Hunyuan Hy3 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Hunyuan Hy3 is cheaper — Open weight (self-host / free) vs $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Hunyuan Hy3 and Laguna XS 2.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Hunyuan Hy3, Laguna XS 2.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Hunyuan Hy3 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Hunyuan Hy3 — released July 6, 2026, about 4 days after Laguna XS 2.1.
Hunyuan Hy3 vs Laguna XS 2.1
Tencent · China | Poolside · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Hunyuan Hy3 for frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost or runs a 295b model at the cost of a 21b — only 21b parameters active per token. Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. On a tight budget at scale, Hunyuan Hy3 is the value pick.
Hunyuan Hy3 (Tencent, China) and Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Hunyuan Hy3 is a 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Context window: 256K vs 256K — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Hunyuan Hy3
Laguna XS 2.1
Provider
Tencent (China)
Poolside (US)
Released
July 6, 2026
July 2, 2026
Context window
256K (~384 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text, code
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
70.9%
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Frontier-level reported reasoning and science (GPQA Diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost
Hunyuan Hy3
A 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost — and it is the newer of the two.
Runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token
Hunyuan Hy3
Hunyuan Hy3 lists runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out
Hunyuan Hy3
Hunyuan Hy3 lists clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters
Laguna XS 2.1
Hunyuan Hy3 is comparatively weak here — benchmarks are largely self-reported, and the ultra-low hosted pricing is a limited promotion
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime
Laguna XS 2.1
Laguna XS 2.1 lists open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime among its strengths; Hunyuan Hy3 does not.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price
Laguna XS 2.1
Laguna XS 2.1 lists cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price among its strengths; Hunyuan Hy3 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Hunyuan Hy3
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Laguna XS 2.1's $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Hunyuan Hy3
At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Laguna XS 2.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Laguna XS 2.1
Larger 256K window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost
→ Hunyuan Hy3
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters
→ Laguna XS 2.1
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Laguna XS 2.1 or Hunyuan Hy3
Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
Hunyuan Hy3: where it fits
A 295B Apache-2.0 open MoE that reaches frontier reasoning quality while running at roughly 21B active-parameter cost. Released July 6, 2026 by Tencent, it is built for frontier-level reported reasoning and science (GPQA Diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost, runs a 295B model at the cost of a 21B — only 21B parameters active per token, clean, unrestricted Apache-2.0 license with no geographic carve-out, and broad day-one ecosystem support plus an FP8 checkpoint.
Its trade-offs are real: benchmarks are largely self-reported, and the ultra-low hosted pricing is a limited promotion, and the hosted API is China-jurisdiction, and self-hosting a 295B MoE still needs serious hardware. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Hunyuan Hy3 (China) and Laguna XS 2.1 (US) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Hunyuan Hy3 is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Want both Hunyuan Hy3 and Laguna XS 2.1 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is Hunyuan Hy3 or Laguna XS 2.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Hunyuan Hy3, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Hunyuan Hy3 leans toward frontier-level reported reasoning and science (gpqa diamond 90.4) at low active-parameter cost while Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Hunyuan Hy3 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Hunyuan Hy3 is cheaper — Open weight (self-host / free) vs $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Hunyuan Hy3 and Laguna XS 2.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Hunyuan Hy3, Laguna XS 2.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Hunyuan Hy3 or Laguna XS 2.1?
Hunyuan Hy3 — released July 6, 2026, about 4 days after Laguna XS 2.1.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.