Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Recursive Flint's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Recursive Flint leads on 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
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 60
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
Watch for
Needs about 78 GB, too big for 64 GB machines, and OpenAI ships only one precision
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
- Documentation and upkeep, 67 against 45
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | gpt-oss-120b | Recursive Flint | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 75 | 75 | even |
| Risk | 20%20 | 95 | 60 | gpt-oss-120b +35 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 90 | 90 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 45 | 67 | Recursive Flint +22 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | BB 70.2/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | gpt-oss-120b | Recursive Flint |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | OpenAI | 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 | 2025-08-26 | 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 | 3.5/5 (4) | 3.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
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.
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
gpt-oss-120b
- Start it with
ollama run gpt-oss:120bon the reference machine, the build that fits - 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 - With vLLM use
vllm serve openai/gpt-oss-120b --tool-call-parser openai --enable-auto-tool-choiceper vLLM's recipe, or parse raw output with openai-harmony - Always use the harmony format through the chat template or openai-harmony, the card says it won't work correctly otherwise
- Set
Reasoning: lowin the system message for short tasks, medium is the default - Pass the reasoning back after a tool call until the final answer, and keep the analysis channel away from end users
- Expect one tool call per turn and loop, don't wait for parallel calls
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, gpt-oss-120b or Recursive Flint?
gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Recursive Flint's 61 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Recursive Flint leads on documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with gpt-oss-120b or Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs gpt-oss-120b
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- Carbon-X vs gpt-oss-120b
- Carbon-X vs Recursive Flint
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs gpt-oss-120b
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Recursive Flint
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs gpt-oss-20b
- gpt-oss-120b vs Granite 4.2 3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Hy3
- gpt-oss-120b vs Inkling
- gpt-oss-120b vs Inkling-Small
- gpt-oss-120b vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kimi K3
- gpt-oss-120b vs Kolibri-1
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna M.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna S 2.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs Laguna XS 2.1
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniCPM5-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniMax-M2.5
- gpt-oss-120b vs MiniMax-M2.7
- gpt-oss-120b vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- gpt-oss-120b vs occamy-1.0
- gpt-oss-120b vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-4B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-9B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.6-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.8-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- gpt-oss-120b vs SmolLM3-3B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- gpt-oss-120b vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- 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/gpt-oss-120b-vs-recursive-flint.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/gpt-oss-120b.json·/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gpt-oss-120b recursive-flint(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gpt-oss-120b", "b": "recursive-flint"}at/mcp, no key