Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Gemma 4 E4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)'s 61 (C), and leads in every scored category. 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
Best for Agents that need a cheap, permissively licensed helper on 8 GB of memory, for tool calls, short audio or images, rather than hard reasoning
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 75
- Risk, 70 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 75 against 53
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 2.5 out of 5
Watch for
No safety evaluation figures published
Best for Small teams and individuals running Qwen3.8-27B for agent or reasoning work who want shorter thinking traces on one 24 GB GPU or Mac.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
PolyForm Small Business licence, free commercially only below 100 people and 1,000,000 USD (2019) revenue
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Gemma 4 E4B IT | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 75 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 45 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +25 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 70 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +15 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 75 | 53 | Gemma 4 E4B IT +22 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 63.2/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Gemma 4 E4B IT | ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B) |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Google DeepMind | BottleCap AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | PolyForm-Small-Business-1.0.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-10-06 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | 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 | 3.5/5 (4) | 2.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Gemma 4 E4B IT
A small cousin for light agent work, tool-calling loops, transcription and image reading on a phone or laptop, under Apache 2.0. Google's 4-bit build needs about 7 GB with working space and runs in all the common runtimes. Google's card puts it far below larger Gemma 4 sizes on agent and coding tasks, with no published safety results.
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
A Qwen3.8-27B with shorter reasoning, for agent work where thinking tokens cost time, and BottleCap's 4-bit GGUF runs in about 19 GB. The main limits are the licence, which needs a paid licence above 100 people or 1,000,000 USD revenue, a gated main repository, and no safety results or training-data description.
Before you call either
Gemma 4 E4B IT
- On the reference machine run
llama-server -hf google/gemma-4-E4B-it-qat-q4_0-gguf --hf-file gemma-4-E4B_q4_0-it.gguf --jinja -c 131072, and add--mmprojwith gemma-4-E4B-it-mmproj.gguf for images and audio - With Ollama run
ollama run gemma4:e4band raise num_ctx or OLLAMA_CONTEXT_LENGTH, since the default context is small and agents want at least 64K - In vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser gemma4 --reasoning-parser gemma4(vLLM also--enable-auto-tool-choice), or tool calls come back as text; Google's w4a16 build is the 4-bit route there - Thinking is off by default; pass enable_thinking=True or start the system prompt with <|think|>, and drop earlier turns' thinking from history except on tool-call turns
- Put images before the text and audio after it, keep audio to 30 seconds and video to 60 frames, and validate tool names and arguments before running them
ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Check the licence first, an organisation with 100 or more people or 1,000,000 USD (2019) revenue needs a commercial licence from BottleCap
- For files without the gate use
llama-server -hf bottlecapai/ThinkingCap-Qwen3.8-27B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 17.4 GB - On vLLM use
--reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_xml, and on SGLang--tool-call-parser qwen3_coder - Set
reasoning_effort(xhigh, medium or low) in chat_template_kwargs, any other value makes the template raise an error - Keep the base's sampling (temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20), the GGUF card says greedy decoding can loop
- The GGUFs carry an MTP head, and llama.cpp builds without MTP support for this architecture may refuse to load them with a missing blk.64 tensor
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Gemma 4 E4B IT or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)?
Gemma 4 E4B IT scores 63.2 (B) on agent readiness against ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)'s 61 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with Gemma 4 E4B IT or ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs gpt-oss-20b
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Inkling-Small
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Kimi K3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs SmolLM3-3B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-4.5-Air vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- GLM-5.3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-120b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-20b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Granite 4.2 3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Hy3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling-Small vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Inkling vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kimi K3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Kolibri-1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna M.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna S 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniCPM5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- occamy-1.0 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.6-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.8-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- SmolLM3-3B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Spark-X2.6-4B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/gemma-4-e4b-it-vs-thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/gemma-4-e4b-it.json·/api/v1/tools/thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gemma-4-e4b-it thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gemma-4-e4b-it", "b": "thinkingcap-qwen3-8-27b"}at/mcp, no key