Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
Apodex-1.1-mini and Recursive Flint score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Recursive Flint leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep. 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 Long-running agent tasks with tools on a 32 GB GPU or Mac, or through Apodex's API, under a plain licence
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 75
- Risk, 65 against 60
Watch for
No safety results, and agent guidance only from the harness
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
- Agent interface, 90 against 85
- Documentation and upkeep, 67 against 38
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Apodex-1.1-mini | Recursive Flint | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 85 | 75 | Apodex-1.1-mini +10 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 65 | 60 | Apodex-1.1-mini +5 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 90 | Recursive Flint +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 38 | 67 | Recursive Flint +29 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Apodex-1.1-mini | Recursive Flint |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Apodex AI | Recursive |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-08-25 | 2026-10-21 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | 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 | 3.3/5 (4) | 3.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Apodex-1.1-mini
An agent cousin fine-tuned from Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for long tasks with files, code and tools, with parallel tool calling and about 3B active parameters. It needs 32 GB for Apodex's GGUF, NVFP4 or GPTQ-Int4 builds or about 86 GB in BF16, and Apodex's API serves it too. The main risks are no safety results and no replies from the publisher.
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
Apodex-1.1-mini
- Serve it with
vllm serve apodex/Apodex-1.1-mini --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser qwen3, or the same parsers in SGLang, so tool calls and reasoning come back parsed - For llama.cpp,
llama-server -hf apodex/Apodex-1.1-mini-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja --reasoning-format deepseek, and the card passes the repository's chat_template.jinja with --chat-template-file - Pass tools through the API's tools parameter rather than in the system prompt, as the card asks
- The card recommends temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, repetition_penalty 1.05 and max_tokens up to 32,768
- Send your own system prompt, or set identity_mode, since the template otherwise adds an Apodex identity block
- The template keeps all earlier reasoning in the context unless
preserve_thinkingis false, which grows long agent sessions - Thinking is on by default, send
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention - The card's Python example has a broken line where it runs the tool (available_toolsname), so fix it to
available_tools[name](**args)before running - Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
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, Apodex-1.1-mini or Recursive Flint?
Apodex-1.1-mini and Recursive Flint score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Recursive Flint leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with Apodex-1.1-mini or Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs Apodex-1.1-mini
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Apodex-1.1-mini
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs BigBang-v1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Carbon-X
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Cosmos-Reason2-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs gpt-oss-20b
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Inkling
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Inkling-Small
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kimi K3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kolibri-1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna M.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs occamy-1.0
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs SmolLM3-3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- 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/apodex-1-1-mini-vs-recursive-flint.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/apodex-1-1-mini.json·/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json - From a terminal
anchor compare apodex-1-1-mini recursive-flint(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "apodex-1-1-mini", "b": "recursive-flint"}at/mcp, no key