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

gpt-oss-120b vs Ripple-65B Preview

gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Ripple-65B Preview's 53.3 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3674 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

  • Reach, 75 against 45
  • Risk, 95 against 55
  • Agent interface, 90 against 75

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

Ripple-65B Preview D

Best for Teams with Blackwell GPUs or a DGX Spark who want an Apache 2.0 coding model to try for terminal and agentic coding work, and can run the publisher's code to serve it.

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

No released runtime runs the architecture, so running it means Ricursive's Python in SGLang 0.5.19 or Transformers' remote code

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Risk gpt-oss-120b +40

gpt-oss-120b 95

File safety earns 25, safetensors only, with metal/model.bin a raw format and not pickle, and nothing from the repository runs on load. Provenance earns 15, files in OpenAI's linked organisation with a hash for every file. Safety evaluation earns 20, published results with SecureBio as an outside evaluator. Agent guidance earns 15 for the trained instruction hierarchy with prompt-injection results. Licence risk keeps all 15. The security programme earns 5 for OpenAI's Bugcrowd programme and disclosure policy, and the advisories half scores 0 because GitHub couldn't be checked, not because it was found missing.

Ripple-65B Preview 55

File safety 15, safetensors only, less 10 because the documented way to run it loads Ricursive's Python. Provenance 15, the files are in the organisation ricursive.com links to, with a checksum on every file. Safety evaluation 10, Ricursive's own FORTRESS and StrongREJECT results. Agent guidance 0, nothing on prompt injection, refusals or safeguards. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw.

Reach gpt-oss-120b +30

gpt-oss-120b 75

Memory earns 10, because the smallest 4-bit build, Ollama's 65 GB gpt-oss:120b, needs about 78 GB with the fifth added, which fits the reference machine but not 64 GB. Runtimes earn the full 25 from Transformers, vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp and Ollama. Builds earn 10, since OpenAI ships one precision, MXFP4. Terms earn 15 for Apache 2.0 with a policy that asks only for lawful use. Download earns 10, with no gate or account. Hosted earns 5, since 11 inference providers serve it on Hugging Face even though OpenAI's own API doesn't.

Ripple-65B Preview 45

Memory 10 of 30, the smallest 4-bit build is Ricursive's NVFP4 at 57.2 GB, 68.7 GB with a fifth added, which is over 64 GB and fits our reference machine. Runtimes 0, no released runtime runs the ricursive architecture with its own code; Ricursive's SGLang plugin and Transformers' remote code don't count. Builds 10, one quantised precision (NVFP4) from Ricursive. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 with nothing added. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 0, Ricursive serves no API, Hugging Face maps no provider, Together AI's page says coming soon, and GMI Cloud's and OpenRouter's pages weren't read.

Agent interface gpt-oss-120b +15

gpt-oss-120b 90

The chat template earns 20, a Jinja file in the repository. The tool-calling format earns 25, since OpenAI documents declarations and returned calls in harmony and tells vLLM users to parse with openai-harmony. Trained tool calling earns 10, because each call stops generation, so calls come one at a time. Structured output earns 15 for the documented Response Formats section with a JSON Schema. Reasoning control earns 10, three effort levels per request with the reasoning on the analysis channel. Context earns 10 for 131,072 trained tokens.

Ripple-65B Preview 75

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, Ricursive's server README says how tools are declared and calls come back, with the ripple parser in SGLang 0.5.19. Trained tool calling 20, one or more calls a turn and agentic-coding RL. Structured output 0, not documented. Reasoning control 0, the template has no thinking switch or effort levels. Context 10, long-context training at 2M-token sequences for a stated 1M.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this rungpt-oss-120bRipple-65B PreviewEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%257545gpt-oss-120b +30
Risk20%209555gpt-oss-120b +40
Agent interface10%109075gpt-oss-120b +15
Documentation and upkeep10%104549Ripple-65B Preview +4
Negative events≤1500
TotalBB 70.2/100D 53.3/100

Facts side by side

Factgpt-oss-120bRipple-65B Preview
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorOpenAIRicursive Intelligence
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2025-08-262026-11-04
Terms last updatedno document linkednot read yet
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews3.5/5 (4)none

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.

Ripple-65B Preview

A dense 65B coding model from a new lab, pretrained from scratch and released today under Apache 2.0, that Ricursive says leads U.S. open-weight models on Terminal-Bench 2.1. Nobody has checked that yet, and the custom architecture runs only through Ricursive's own SGLang plugin on Blackwell GPUs, with a 57 GB NVFP4 build as the smallest.

Before you call either

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

Ripple-65B Preview

  1. Run Ricursive's launcher from inference/server with uv run --script serve.py on two B200 GPUs; it listens on 127.0.0.1:30000 with a 16K context by default
  2. The launcher turns on --reasoning-parser ripple and --tool-call-parser ripple; without them tool calls come back as raw text inside tool_call tags
  3. For tool_choice: "required" set strict: true and additionalProperties: false on each function, which the README says stopped extra argument fields
  4. Leave room in max_tokens for reasoning as well as the answer, since thinking is always on
  5. Use chat_template.jinja, not the template inside tokenizer_config.json, which has no tool support

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, gpt-oss-120b or Ripple-65B Preview?

gpt-oss-120b scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Ripple-65B Preview's 53.3 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories.

Other comparisons with gpt-oss-120b or Ripple-65B Preview

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.