No cloud, no GPUs, no problem: Liquid AI's new model LFM2.5-2.6B brings powerful AI agents to devices as small as a Raspberry Pi

Read full story on VentureBeat
Share
No cloud, no GPUs, no problem: Liquid AI's new model LFM2.5-2.6B brings powerful AI agents to devices as small as a Raspberry Pi
AI disclosure

Summary

<p>Earlier this week, the AI startup Liquid, formed in 2023 by former MIT computer scientists, <a href="https://www.liquid.ai/blog/lfm2-5-2-6b">debuted LFM2.5-2.6B</a>, a new open-weight language model designed specifically for agentic workloads. </p><p>In release materials and a recent interview with VentureBeat, Liquid&#x27;s researchers said LFM2.5-2.6B can run entirely on local hardware — from smartphones and laptops down to a Raspberry Pi — without relying on cloud inference or GPUs, unlocking edge AI applications and giving more options to enterprises working in regulated industries or with sensitive information they don&#x27;t want to send up to the cloud. </p><p>It&#x27;s best suited for high-volume, well-defined agentic tasks that run locally — tool calling, document management, calendar and workflow automation, and always-on background routines — and for connectivity-limited environments like vehicles and robotics, though coding-heavy work is better left to larger models.</p><p>Even for those businesses without such concerns, the appeal of running performant, task-specific agents at the cost of essentially electricity, may be enough to make the new model quite appealing. </p><p>But the <a href="https://huggingface.co/LiquidAI/LFM2.5-2.6B/blob/main/LICENSE">custom open weights license</a>, as with <a href="https://venturebeat.com/technology/kimi-k3s-full-weights-are-here-but-theyre-open-with-a-caveat-what-enterprises-should-know">Moonshot&#x27;s larger frontier model Kimi K3</a> released last month, is worth a close look by enterprise legal teams. </p><h2><b>The basics</b></h2><p>LFM2.5-2.6B contains 2.6 billion parameters, supports a 128,000-token context window, and includes native tool calling. The somewhat tricky name is explained by the generation of model (2.5) combined with the parameter count (2.6B). </p><p>Both the post-trained model and a base checkpoint (LFM2.5-2.6B-Base) for developers who want to fine-tune it are available now on <a href="https://huggingface.co/LiquidAI/LFM2.5-2.6B">Hugging Face</a>, with day-one support for major inference stacks including llama.cpp, MLX, vLLM, SGLang, and ONNX — positioning it for deployment across consumer hardware, enterprise infrastructure, and embedded systems.</p><p>Liquid also offers an open source fine-tuning framework, <a href="https://github.com/Liquid4All/leap-finetune">LEAP</a>.</p><p>Rather than positioning LFM2.5-2.6B as a competitor to the largest frontier models, the company is making a different argument: that a sufficiently capable small model can unlock categories of enterprise applications where latency, privacy, deployment flexibility, or inference costs matter more than absolute benchmark leadership.</p><p>&quot;I do also believe that the best models will be in the cloud, and there&#x27;s no problem with that,&quot; Maxime Labonne, Liquid AI&#x27;s head of post-training, told VentureBeat in an interview following the launch. &quot;We want to make models for another type of user, and the best way of describing it is: you should use [edge AI] when you can&#x27;t use a cloud model.&quot;</p><h2><b>Small enough for a Raspberry Pi</b></h2><p>Asked about the minimum viable hardware, Labonne said the model runs &quot;very, very well&quot; on CPUs — and that the LFM2 architecture underlying the model was explicitly designed around real-world CPU performance rather than GPU benchmarks.</p><p>&quot;I think the best example is a Raspberry Pi,&quot; he said. &quot;We have a lot of demos that show that actually, it works pretty fast on the Raspberry Pi.&quot;</p><p>Company-reported measurements indicate decoding throughput of approximately 220 tokens per second on an Apple M5 Max and 113 tokens per second on an AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395, while using less than 2.5 GB of memory — and around 30 tokens per second on a smartphone. Users can try the models on their phones through Apollo, Liquid AI&#x27;s mobile app.</p><p>At the other end of the deployment spectrum, Liquid AI reports the model reaches nearly 15,000 output tokens per second on a single Nvidia H100 GPU under sustained concurrent load — roughly 1.3 billion tokens per day on one card. These figures are vendor benchmarks and have not been independently verified.</p><p>For Labonne, memory footprint and speed are not conveniences but hard constraints that determine what can be deployed at all.</p><p>&quot;What we want to show is that it&#x27;s a really good trade-off, because you get the level of quality that you get with much bigger models, but in a tiny, tiny form factor,&quot; he said. &quot;You can deploy it in target devices where you are not able to deploy the other ones at all.&quot;</p><h2><b>Trained for agents instead of chatbots</b></h2><p>Liquid AI says LFM2.5-2.6B was developed around the assumption that language models are increasingly consumed through agent frameworks rather than traditional conversational interfaces.</p><p>&quot;Models are not consumed in chatbots anymore. They&#x27;re really consumed through agentic harnesses, like OpenClaw, like Hermes Agent,&quot; Labonne said. &quot;We wanted to make sure that this model is not just good at math or at code, but it&#x27;s good at using tools.&quot;</p><p>The model is pretrained on approximately 34 trillion tokens, with a vocabulary doubled to 128K to better support non-Latin scripts and a dedicated mid-training phase to extend the context window to 128K tokens for long-running agent workflows.</p><p>Post-training follows a four-stage pipeline: supervised fine-tuning, teacher specialization (training separate expert models for domains like instruction following, math, code, and tool use), multi-domain on-policy distillation (MOPD) to merge those experts&#x27; capabilities back into a single student model, and finally agentic reinforcement learning. </p><p>During that last stage, the model was trained directly inside production agent harnesses — including Hermes Agent and OpenClaw — on realistic productivity tasks involving research, coding, document management, tool invocation, and workflow automation, exposing it to those harnesses&#x27; actual tools, system prompts, and interaction patterns.</p><p>Labonne described the pipeline overhaul as producing a &quot;happy accident&quot;: gains that extended well beyond the agentic targets.</p><p>&quot;Through these new training techniques, we also got a lot better at everything. We got better at math, at instruction following. We&#x27;ve never been good at code, actually — and with this, we even got really good at code,&quot; he said.</p><h2><b>Building the model — and the harness</b></h2><p>Notably, Liquid AI also built its own agent harness rather than relying solely on existing frameworks, and demonstrated the model running inside it on a phone, planning and calling tools entirely on-device.</p><p>&quot;This is a harness running on a phone, and I don&#x27;t know if there&#x27;s any other harness running on a phone,&quot; Labonne said.</p><p>The company had two reasons, he explained. The first was necessity — no phone-native harness existed. The second is a different interaction model: today&#x27;s harnesses wait for a prompt, and Liquid AI wants assistants that act on their own.</p><p>&quot;We want proactive agents. We want agents that run in the background, check what you&#x27;re doing, check your calendar, and based on this context, do tasks,&quot; he said. &quot;That doesn&#x27;t exist today, really.&quot;</p><p>Co-designing the harness and model also lets the software compensate for the model&#x27;s weak spots. &quot;Everything that the model is bad at, the harness should help the model with — provide as much assistance as possible to make it more reliable,&quot; Labonne said. &quot;End users don&#x27;t care if it&#x27;s the model or the harness. What they want is that the task is achieved at the end of the day.&quot;</p><p>The model nevertheless works out of the box with established harnesses including Hermes Agent, OpenClaw, and Pi, served behind any OpenAI-compatible endpoint.</p><h2><b>Swap the harness, not the model</b></h2><p>For enterprise deployment, Labonne argued the release marks a shift in what small models can be used for. Until now, he said, local models made economic sense mainly as narrowly fine-tuned specialists — trained to do one thing at cloud-model quality, much faster and cheaper. Agentic capability changes that calculus, because the same model can be repurposed by changing the tools around it rather than the model itself.</p><p>&quot;You can have a calendar assistant, and you can reuse the same model and make a meeting assistant that will record what everybody said and summarize it — a bit like Granola, for example,&quot; he said. &quot;You don&#x27;t change the model; you just change the harness. You just change the tools around it. This gives much more generalizability, and it&#x27;s a lot easier to do and a lot cheaper as well.&quot;</p><p>He still recommends fine-tuning for production deployments whenever feasible: &quot;If you don&#x27;t fine-tune it, you leave some quality on the table. If you fine-tune it well, it&#x27;s going to match the performance of GPT and Claude — really, if your task is not the most complex task in the world,&quot; he said, adding that the barrier to entry has collapsed: &quot;The bar to be able to do fine-tuning now is super low. It&#x27;s very accessible to everyone.&quot;</p><h2><b>How it stacks up against DeepSeek-V4-Flash, Google&#x27;s Gemma and Alibaba&#x27;s Qwen</b></h2><p>Liquid AI released its own benchmark comparison charts pitting LFM2.5-2.6B against the models enterprises are most likely to shortlist for the same edge deployments: Google&#x27;s Gemma 4 E2B (5.1B parameters) and E4B (8B), and Alibaba&#x27;s Qwen3.5-4B (4.7B) and Qwen3.5-9B (9.7B). </p><p>A separate test by local AI client platform <a href="https://x.com/atomic_chat_hq/status/2085405031474343963">Atomic Chat</a> found that LFM2.5-2.6B completed 35 tool calls to complete three tasks (checking weather and local time in six cities, converting one budget into six currencies, checking four hotels and booking for a date) 3.7 times faster than DeepSeek-V4-Flash (a whopping 284B parameters), the model has <a href="https://x.com/natolambert/status/2084790959636922652?s=20">skyrocketed</a> to the top of <a href="https://openrouter.ai/rankings#top-models">OpenRouter</a> since its release last week. </p><div></div><p>Gemma 4&#x27;s small models are multimodal generalists, accepting image and audio input alongside text, and use a Per-Layer Embeddings design that keeps only a fraction of their weights active per token — which is why Google markets them by &quot;effective&quot; size (2.3B and 4.5B) despite total footprints of 5.1B and 8B. Alibaba&#x27;s Qwen3.5 small series, <a href="https://venturebeat.com/technology/alibabas-small-open-source-qwen3-5-9b-beats-openais-gpt-oss-120b-and-can-run">released in March</a>, is natively multimodal from 4B up and leans on scaled reinforcement learning to chase frontier-style reasoning — Alibaba touts the 9B model as matching or beating OpenAI&#x27;s far larger gpt-oss-120B on reasoning benchmarks.</p><p>LFM2.5-2.6B takes a narrower path: it is text-only, dense, and specialized for agentic work, with Liquid AI shipping separate vision and audio variants of the LFM family rather than folding everything into one checkpoint. </p><p>Where Qwen&#x27;s post-training reinforcement learning targets reasoning, Liquid&#x27;s targets tool use inside real agent harnesses. </p><p>The result, per the company&#x27;s published numbers, is that the smallest model in the comparison leads every instruction-following benchmark (IFBench, Multi-IF, IFStruct) and nearly every tool-use benchmark — 77.83 on ToolSandbox versus 76.44 for Qwen3.5-9B, a model nearly four times its size — trailing only that 9B model on BFCLv4. </p><p>On agentic evaluations it beats both Gemma models across the board and essentially ties the Qwens: 26.89 on BrowseComp+ versus 27.23 for Qwen3.5-9B. It also posts the best score on AA Omniscience, a knowledge benchmark that penalizes hallucination.</p><p>The Qwen models keep the edge where their training focus lies: math (Qwen3.5-9B leads AIME25) and coding, where larger models retain an advantage on LiveCodeBench — though Labonne noted the gap is smaller than the parameter counts would suggest.</p><p>&quot;With LiveCodeBench v6, we might not be the best among these models, but we&#x27;re also by far the smallest. Showing that we&#x27;re competitive with them is already quite a big win for me,&quot; he said.</p><p>One differentiator cuts the other way: licensing. Gemma 4 and Qwen3.5 ship under the permissive Apache 2.0 license — <a href="https://venturebeat.com/technology/google-releases-gemma-4-under-apache-2-0-and-that-license-change-may-matter">a change Google made specifically to court enterprises</a>. DeepSeek-V4-Flash ships <a href="https://huggingface.co/datasets/choosealicense/licenses/blob/main/markdown/mit.md">under a similarly permissive MIT License</a>. </p><p>Meanwhile, Liquid AI&#x27;s revenue-gated license (detailed below) asks larger companies to strike a commercial deal. Enterprises above the threshold are effectively trading license friction for footprint and tool-use performance.</p><h2><b>Licensing reflects a commercial middle ground</b></h2><p>LFM2.5-2.6B is distributed under the <a href="https://huggingface.co/LiquidAI/LFM2.5-2.6B/blob/main/LICENSE">LFM Open License v1.0,</a> which permits use, modification, and redistribution — including commercial use — for organizations with less than $10 million in annual revenue. Commercial use by larger companies is not covered by the license, requiring a separate arrangement with Liquid AI; qualified nonprofits are exempt from the threshold for non-commercial and research purposes.</p><p>Labonne framed the structure as a way to sustain model development — &quot;the models are really the moats, so we need to be sensible in the way that we license them; otherwise, we cannot make money, so we can&#x27;t make more models&quot; — while characterizing the threshold as a light-touch mechanism in practice.</p><p>Asked how the company would even know if a large enterprise quietly deployed the open weights, he was candid: &quot;I think this is a question for our legal team, but personally, I don&#x27;t know. And even if you&#x27;re above $10 million, the only thing that we ask you is to contact us.&quot;</p><p>The company pairs its licensed model releases with freely published research, he added, including new structured-output evaluations and a training technique that mitigates the repetition loops common in small models — a failure mode he noted Qwen models are &quot;kind of guilty of.&quot;</p><h2><b>Small model, big enterprise implications</b></h2><p>The launch coincided with an announcement from <a href="https://www.liquid.ai/blog/macpaw-partners-liquid-ai-on-device-ai-mac-users">MacPaw</a>, the Ukrainian software company behind CleanMyMac and Setapp, of a long-term strategic partnership with Liquid AI to build an on-device AI stack for the Mac. </p><p>Liquid AI will design and fine-tune foundation models for Eney, MacPaw&#x27;s macOS assistant, running locally on Apple silicon through MacPaw&#x27;s Elix inference engine and Mnemos memory layer, with results expected later this year.</p><p>Labonne pointed to the deal as a concrete validation of the size argument: &quot;One of the reasons why they chose us is also because the model is quite small, and they don&#x27;t have all the memory budget to run the other models.&quot;</p><p>The release arrives as hardware vendors, operating system developers, and enterprise software companies increasingly invest in local AI execution — and as agent harnesses proliferate across the industry. Liquid AI&#x27;s bet is that deployment economics, not raw scale, will define an important segment of that market: agents running continuously, everywhere, at zero marginal token cost.</p><p>Whether small, highly optimized agent models become a significant segment of enterprise AI will ultimately depend less on benchmark scores than on operational reliability. But Liquid AI&#x27;s latest release suggests the next competitive frontier is no longer simply building larger models — it&#x27;s building models small enough, and capable enough, to run wherever enterprise workflows already live.</p>

Original reporting

Open original source

Related coverage

Read full article on VentureBeat

Get the AFBytes Brief

Major stories, AI-assisted analysis, and what to watch next. Free, monthly, unsubscribe anytime.