Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Darwin-36B-Opus vs gpt-oss-120b

gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Darwin-36B-Opus's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Darwin-36B-Opus leads on reach 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 2870 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Darwin-36B-Opus C

Best for Reasoning-heavy text tasks on a 32 GB machine or a single 80 GB GPU, where a disclosed training method isn't required

Ahead on

  • Reach, 80 against 75
  • Documentation and upkeep, 51 against 45

Watch for

The merge method is proprietary and the current weights include an undescribed targeted refinement

gpt-oss-120b BB

Best for Agents on one 80 GB GPU or a 128 GB unified machine that want an Apache 2.0 reasoning model with wide runtime support

Ahead on

  • Risk, 95 against 55
  • Agent interface, 90 against 70

Also in its favour

  • Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 2.5 out of 5

Watch for

Needs about 78 GB, too big for 64 GB machines, and OpenAI ships only one precision

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runDarwin-36B-Opusgpt-oss-120bEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%258075Darwin-36B-Opus +5
Risk20%205595gpt-oss-120b +40
Agent interface10%107090gpt-oss-120b +20
Documentation and upkeep10%105145Darwin-36B-Opus +6
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100BB 70.2/100

Facts side by side

FactDarwin-36B-Opusgpt-oss-120b
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorFINAL-Bench (VIDRAFT)OpenAI
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-04-232025-08-26
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno 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 reviews2.5/5 (4)3.5/5 (4)

Verdicts

Darwin-36B-Opus

A text-only reasoning cousin merged from Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and a reasoning-distilled fine-tune of it, with about 3B active parameters. It needs 32 GB for the publisher's 4-bit GGUF or about 83 GB in BF16, and runs in vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp. The main risks are an undisclosed merge method, a card that disagrees with its files, and no safety results.

gpt-oss-120b

A reasoning and agent cousin that runs in most runtimes under Apache 2.0 with published safety work. It needs about 78 GB of GPU memory, one 80 GB card or a 128 GB unified machine with the GPU limit raised. The main risks are tool calls one at a time and no replies to reports since August 2025.

Before you call either

Darwin-36B-Opus

  1. Quickest start is llama-server -hf FINAL-Bench/POCKET-35B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 21 GB of files
  2. On the reference machine BF16 fits, vllm serve FINAL-Bench/Darwin-36B-Opus --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, the parsers for Qwen3.6's format
  3. Thinking is on by default, send chat_template_kwargs with enable_thinking false for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention
  4. The card suggests temperature 0.6 to 0.7 and at least 5,120 new tokens for its think traces
  5. generation_config.json stops only on the end-of-text token, so add <|im_end|> as a stop token if a runtime keeps generating after the turn ends
  6. Text only, the vision encoder of Qwen3.6-35B-A3B isn't in these files
  7. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

gpt-oss-120b

  1. Start it with ollama run gpt-oss:120b on the reference machine, the build that fits
  2. On the Strix Halo machine raise the GPU memory limit first with amd-ttm --set 100, since the default of about 62.8 GiB is below the 78 GB it needs
  3. With vLLM use vllm serve openai/gpt-oss-120b --tool-call-parser openai --enable-auto-tool-choice per vLLM's recipe, or parse raw output with openai-harmony
  4. Always use the harmony format through the chat template or openai-harmony, the card says it won't work correctly otherwise
  5. Set Reasoning: low in the system message for short tasks, medium is the default
  6. Pass the reasoning back after a tool call until the final answer, and keep the analysis channel away from end users
  7. Expect one tool call per turn and loop, don't wait for parallel calls

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Darwin-36B-Opus or gpt-oss-120b?

gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Darwin-36B-Opus's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Darwin-36B-Opus leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Darwin-36B-Opus or gpt-oss-120b

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.