LFM3-1.7B vs Reflection Beam 1.0

Liquid AI · US  |  Reflection AI · US · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

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. Pick Reflection Beam 1.0 for 501b-parameter sparse moe (about 23b active per token) with weights on hugging face under apache 2.0 or reflection claims 3-4x less inference compute than rival models (vendor claim).

LFM3-1.7B (Liquid AI) and Reflection Beam 1.0 (Reflection AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. 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. Reflection Beam 1.0 is reflection AI's first open-weight model - a 501B Apache 2.0 MoE announced October 5 with weights published October 16, 2026, pitched as a US alternative to Chinese open models. Their biggest split is context window, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecLFM3-1.7BReflection Beam 1.0
ProviderLiquid AI (US) Reflection AI (US)
ReleasedOctober 27, 2026 October 16, 2026
Context window256K tokens (~384 pages) 1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)Open weight (self-host / free) Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?Yes — self-hostable Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext text, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Very small open-weight text model - about 1.73B parameters with a 256K-token context for on-device use

LFM3-1.7B

Reflection Beam 1.0 is comparatively weak here — self-hosting needs about 353 GB of GPU memory even at NVFP4, and kernels are CUDA-only for now

Liquid says it can power agentic applications that used to need 9B parameters

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.

Part of a six-model LFM3 family covering text, vision, audio, omni and decision tasks

LFM3-1.7B

Reflection Beam 1.0 is comparatively weak here — headline benchmarks come from Reflection's own model card; independent evaluation was limited at launch

501B-parameter sparse MoE (about 23B active per token) with weights on Hugging Face under Apache 2.0

Reflection Beam 1.0

Its 1M tokens window holds about 3.9× more than LFM3-1.7B's 256K tokens in a single prompt.

Reflection claims 3-4x less inference compute than rival models (vendor claim)

Reflection Beam 1.0

Reflection AI's first open-weight model - a 501B Apache 2.0 MoE announced October 5 with weights published October 16, 2026, pitched as a US alternative to Chinese open models — and it carries the larger 1M tokens context.

Fast and cheap to run: Artificial Analysis measured about 385 output tokens/sec and $0.12 per index task

Reflection Beam 1.0

Reflection Beam 1.0 lists fast and cheap to run: Artificial Analysis measured about 385 output tokens/sec and $0.12 per index task among its strengths; LFM3-1.7B does not.

Largest single-prompt input

Reflection Beam 1.0

Its 1M tokens window is about 3.9× larger than LFM3-1.7B's 256K tokens, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.

Which should you pick?

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

→ Reflection Beam 1.0

Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.

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

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is 501b-parameter sparse moe (about 23b active per token) with weights on hugging face under apache 2.0

→ Reflection Beam 1.0

That is its strongest area.

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 are real: 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.

Reflection Beam 1.0: where it fits

Reflection AI's first open-weight model - a 501B Apache 2.0 MoE announced October 5 with weights published October 16, 2026, pitched as a US alternative to Chinese open models. Released October 16, 2026 by Reflection AI, it is built for 501B-parameter sparse MoE (about 23B active per token) with weights on Hugging Face under Apache 2.0, reflection claims 3-4x less inference compute than rival models (vendor claim), fast and cheap to run: Artificial Analysis measured about 385 output tokens/sec and $0.12 per index task, and third-party hosts list it from $0.25/$1.00 per million tokens (Nebius, as of Oct 27); Reflection's own API is in free beta.

Its trade-offs: artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 30, well below DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GLM-5.3 (45), text-only input; some users report reasoning loops on long agent runs, self-hosting needs about 353 GB of GPU memory even at NVFP4, and kernels are CUDA-only for now, and headline benchmarks come from Reflection's own model card; independent evaluation was limited at launch. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

The bottom line for this matchup

LFM3-1.7B and Reflection Beam 1.0 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Reflection Beam 1.0 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — LFM3-1.7B for very small open-weight text model - about 1.73b parameters with a 256k-token context for on-device use, Reflection Beam 1.0 for 501b-parameter sparse moe (about 23b active per token) with weights on hugging face under apache 2.0. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.

Want both LFM3-1.7B and Reflection Beam 1.0 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 pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is LFM3-1.7B or Reflection Beam 1.0 better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, LFM3-1.7B leans toward very small open-weight text model - about 1.73b parameters with a 256k-token context for on-device use while Reflection Beam 1.0 leans toward 501b-parameter sparse moe (about 23b active per token) with weights on hugging face under apache 2.0, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, LFM3-1.7B or Reflection Beam 1.0?

They are priced almost identically, so cost will not decide between them.

Which has the bigger context window?

Reflection Beam 1.0 — 1M tokens vs 256K tokens, about 3.9× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.

Can I use both LFM3-1.7B and Reflection Beam 1.0 together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you LFM3-1.7B, Reflection Beam 1.0 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, LFM3-1.7B or Reflection Beam 1.0?

LFM3-1.7B — released October 27, 2026, about 11 days after Reflection Beam 1.0.

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.