Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-1.7B
Poolside · US | Liquid AI · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
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. Pick LFM3-1.7B for very small open-weight text model - about 1.73b parameters with a 256k-token context for on-device use or liquid says it can power agentic applications that used to need 9b parameters. On a tight budget at scale, LFM3-1.7B is the value pick.
Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside) and LFM3-1.7B (Liquid AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. 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. LFM3-1.7B is liquid AI's October 27, 2026 on-device text model - about 1.73B parameters and 256K context, with open weights under a license capped at $10M annual revenue. 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 tokens — 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.
- ▸Recency: LFM3-1.7B is the newer model by about 4 months (released October 27, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Laguna XS 2.1 | LFM3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Poolside (US) | Liquid AI (US) |
| Released | July 2, 2026 | October 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 256K (~393 pages) | 256K tokens (~384 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens | Open weight (self-host / free) |
| Open weight? | Yes — self-hostable | Yes — self-hostable |
| Modalities | text, code | text |
| SWE-Bench Verified | 70.9% | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | Not published |
Who wins what
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters
Laguna XS 2.1
Laguna XS 2.1 lists remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters among its strengths; LFM3-1.7B does not.
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; LFM3-1.7B does not.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price
Laguna XS 2.1
LFM3-1.7B is comparatively weak here — no published per-token API price found
Very small open-weight text model - about 1.73B parameters with a 256K-token context for on-device use
LFM3-1.7B
Liquid AI's October 27, 2026 on-device text model - about 1.73B parameters and 256K context, with open weights under a license capped at $10M annual revenue — and it is the newer of the two.
Liquid says it can power agentic applications that used to need 9B parameters
LFM3-1.7B
Laguna XS 2.1 is comparatively weak here — weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise
Part of a six-model LFM3 family covering text, vision, audio, omni and decision tasks
LFM3-1.7B
LFM3-1.7B lists part of a six-model LFM3 family covering text, vision, audio, omni and decision tasks among its strengths; Laguna XS 2.1 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
LFM3-1.7B
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
→ LFM3-1.7B
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 remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters
→ Laguna XS 2.1
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is very small open-weight text model - about 1.73b parameters with a 256k-token context for on-device use
→ LFM3-1.7B
That is its strongest area.
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 are real: 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.
LFM3-1.7B: where it fits
Liquid AI's October 27, 2026 on-device text model - about 1.73B parameters and 256K context, with open weights under a license capped at $10M annual revenue. Released October 27, 2026 by Liquid AI, it is built for very small open-weight text model - about 1.73B parameters with a 256K-token context for on-device use, liquid says it can power agentic applications that used to need 9B parameters, part of a six-model LFM3 family covering text, vision, audio, omni and decision tasks, and supports 16 languages.
Its trade-offs: lFM Open License v1.0 covers commercial use only below $10M annual revenue; larger firms need a paid license, liquid says it is not recommended for agentic coding or complex multi-step reasoning because of its size, text-only; vision and audio need other LFM3 checkpoints, and no published per-token API price found. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
Laguna XS 2.1 and LFM3-1.7B overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. LFM3-1.7B costs less per token; Laguna XS 2.1 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters, LFM3-1.7B for very small open-weight text model - about 1.73b parameters with a 256k-token context for on-device use. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Laguna XS 2.1 and LFM3-1.7B 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.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Laguna XS 2.1 or LFM3-1.7B better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for LFM3-1.7B, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters while LFM3-1.7B leans toward very small open-weight text model - about 1.73b parameters with a 256k-token context for on-device use, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Laguna XS 2.1 or LFM3-1.7B?
LFM3-1.7B is cheaper — $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs Open weight (self-host / free).
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 256K vs 256K tokens is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Laguna XS 2.1 and LFM3-1.7B together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Laguna XS 2.1, LFM3-1.7B 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, Laguna XS 2.1 or LFM3-1.7B?
LFM3-1.7B — released October 27, 2026, about 4 months after Laguna XS 2.1.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.