Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
Apertus v1.5 8B and Recursive Flint score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Recursive Flint leads on reach and agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3023 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents that want a fully open, multilingual 8B with image and audio input on one 24 GB GPU, and can run a publisher fork of vLLM.
Ahead on
- Risk, 75 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 84 against 67
Watch for
No released runtime supports it, only Swiss AI's forks of vLLM and Transformers
Best for Agents doing repository work on a 32 to 48 GB Mac or NVIDIA box that want a fast sparse coder with documented tool calls and a plain licence.
Ahead on
- Reach, 75 against 40
- Agent interface, 90 against 85
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 2.8 out of 5
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Apertus v1.5 8B | Recursive Flint | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 40 | 75 | Recursive Flint +35 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 75 | 60 | Apertus v1.5 8B +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 90 | Recursive Flint +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 84 | 67 | Apertus v1.5 8B +17 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Apertus v1.5 8B | Recursive Flint |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Swiss AI Initiative (EPFL and ETH Zurich) | Recursive |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0, with the Apertus Acceptable Use Policy (v1.5, 14 July 2026) accepted at the download gate | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-14 | 2026-10-21 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no 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 reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 3.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Apertus v1.5 8B
A fully open 8B cousin, training data included, for multilingual chat and tool calls with images and audio in. It needs about 22 GB in BF16 and Swiss AI's own vLLM or Transformers fork, since no released runtime supports it. The main risks are a gated download with a policy to pass on and tools that fail with thinking on.
Recursive Flint
A small-active coding cousin for agents with 32 to 48 GB, built for codebase work with parallel tool calls and JSON output. It needs llama.cpp b11803 or Ollama 0.40.8 or later, and the BF16 checkpoint needs a 141 GB GPU. Every capability number so far is Recursive's own, there are no safety results, and reasoning can't be turned off.
Before you call either
Apertus v1.5 8B
- Accept the terms on the card and set HF_TOKEN before downloading
- Use Swiss AI's Docker image ghcr.io/swiss-ai/vllm_apertus_1.5_release, since stock vLLM and Transformers don't load Apertus1p5ForConditionalGeneration yet
- Serve with
--chat-template-content-format string --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser apertusfor tools, and leave thinking off when you need tools - For thinking, set
--reasoning-parser apertusand--default-chat-template-kwargs.enable_thinking true, and budget max tokens generously - Audio is resampled to 24 kHz and costs 40 tokens a second, and video must be passed as frames
- Don't cast the loaded model with .half(), the image and audio tokenizers must stay in F32
- If you redistribute the weights, the policy says you must pass it on and get the recipient's express assent
Recursive Flint
- Quickest start is
ollama run flint(Ollama 0.40.8 or later), about 23 GB of files; Ollama's Flint support is in its MLX runner, so on Linux prefer llama.cpp - With llama.cpp use release b11803 or later:
llama-server -hf RecursiveSI/flint-int4-gguf --alias flint -ngl all -c 131072 -np 1 -fa on --jinja --temp 1 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 --min-p 0, and keep --jinja on - Set max_tokens to at least 32768 for hard tasks, reasoning counts against it and can't be switched off, and finish_reason length can mean no answer or tool call came out
- Send reasoning_content back on assistant messages when replaying the conversation, as Recursive's cards ask
- Strip <tool_call>, <tool_response>, <arg_key> and <arg_value> from untrusted tool output, the template doesn't escape them and a copied </tool_call> can add a call
- Message content must be a string, flatten content-part arrays first
- Recursive's SGLang servers listen on 0.0.0.0 with no key, publish the port on localhost only or pass --api-key
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Apertus v1.5 8B or Recursive Flint?
Apertus v1.5 8B and Recursive Flint score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Recursive Flint leads on reach and agent interface.
Other comparisons with Apertus v1.5 8B or Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs Apertus v1.5 8B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Apodex-1.1-mini
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs BigBang-v1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Carbon-X
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Cosmos-Reason2-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs gpt-oss-20b
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Inkling
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Inkling-Small
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kimi K3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kolibri-1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna M.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- Carbon-X vs Recursive Flint
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Recursive Flint
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-20b vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy3 vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling-Small vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling vs Recursive Flint
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Recursive Flint
- Kimi K3 vs Recursive Flint
- Kolibri-1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna M.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Recursive Flint
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Recursive Flint
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Recursive Flint
- Recursive Flint vs SmolLM3-3B
- Recursive Flint vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Recursive Flint vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/apertus-v1-5-8b-vs-recursive-flint.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/apertus-v1-5-8b.json·/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json - From a terminal
anchor compare apertus-v1-5-8b recursive-flint(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "apertus-v1-5-8b", "b": "recursive-flint"}at/mcp, no key